https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=80730
--- Comment #2 from joseph at codesourcery dot com <joseph at codesourcery dot com> --- See <https://www.polyomino.org.uk/computer/c/const-exprs-c99.txt> for my old syntactic model of constant expressions in C99. I'd consider it appropriate to handle implicit conversions in initializers exactly the same as casts are handled. Essentially, I think that the intent for address constants is something syntactic (including implicit type conversions and conversions of arrays to pointers in the syntax) which is only approximated by the wording. Much like e.g. C90 and C99 both messed up the definition of lvalue in different ways and only C11 captured the essential concept of lvalues as everyone understood them.
