http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16602
Sebastian Unger <sebunger44 at gmail dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |sebunger44 at gmail dot com
--- Comment #11 from Sebastian Unger <sebunger44 at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to Joseph S. Myers from comment #6)
> When you apply const to "array of int", the resulting type is "array of
> const int" not "const array of int"; that's how type qualifiers and arrays
> interact in C, there is no such thing as a qualified array type. "array of
> const int" is not a const-qualified type in C.
Can anybody provide a reference to the standard to the effect of this claim?
Because I can't find any, and I do believe this statement is wrong. All other
comments claiming this issue to be invalid are based on this (as are all
examples claiming to show that the original issue breaks the constness
promise).
I'm inclined to reopen this issue unless someone can point me to the standard
for this.
