https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=92010
--- Comment #6 from Patrick Palka <ppalka at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Patrick Palka from comment #5)
> The ICE seems to be revealing a latent issue: In the following example
> (which GCC accepts), according to the static_assert labelled (1), the type
> of t is const int*, but according to the static_assert labelled (2), the
> type of t is int *const.
>
>
>
> template <typename T>
> void foo(const T t)
> {
> static_assert(__is_same(decltype(t), const int*)); // (1)
> }
>
> static_assert(__is_same(decltype(foo<int[]>), void(int *))); // (2)
>
> int
> main()
> {
> foo<int[]>(nullptr);
> }
So the question becomes, what should the type of t be here? According to
https://eel.is/c++draft/temp#deduct-3:
"A top-level qualifier in a function parameter declaration does not affect the
function type but still affects the type of the function parameter variable
within the function."
The above suggests that the type of foo<int[]> should be the same regardless of
where the parameter t is const-qualified. Going by this then, it appears that
the static_assert (2) is right and (1) is wrong. Can anyone confirm?
(On the other hand, Clang thinks (1) is right and (2) is wrong.)
