https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65455
--- Comment #19 from joseph at codesourcery dot com <joseph at codesourcery dot com> --- On Thu, 13 Aug 2015, mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > So this looks like a dup of PR39985. It seems that, if anything, we should > modify __typeof to drop all qualifiers. I.e. that all of the following > __typeofs yield "int": Yes, I think so as a matter of language design, but there is a risk to existing code (that declares aliases, for example) and there may be a use for a new typeof variant that always returns the declared type when passed an lvalue. Minimally and probably more safely, __typeof should drop all qualifiers on rvalues (including those returned by functions returning qualified type, or resulting from cast to qualified type; note that the proposed resolution to DR#423 would require changes to remove the qualifiers from function return types so that "const int foo(int);" and "int foo(int);" are compatible declarations, which would probably be safest if only done for C11 and above).
