https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=87041
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Church <achurch+gcc at achurch dot org> --- I agree it's a good idea to warn if the code is reachable, but if not, it's only so much noise. I can see that in this case the second const makes no difference to code generation, but I'd prefer not to modify the macro since doing so would go against the style of related code, which does in fact use *const where appropriate to ensure pointer variables are not inadvertently changed. I'd also be a bit concerned that future changes to dataflow analysis or optimization passes could trigger the warning even without the const, at which point it would be less trivial to work around.
