https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91889
--- Comment #8 from Marc Glisse <glisse at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
int i;
void f(int* const&) { }
void f(const int* const &) { }
void g(int* p) { f(p); }
void h() { f(&i); }
I find it painful that g is ambiguous, and confusing that h remains ok. It
needs confirmation that CWG really means for that to happen. The example the DR
wants to "fix" doesn't seem that important to me.
