https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=103427
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> --- int*& is a reference to a pointer, and is perfectly valid. You can't have a pointer to a reference (a reference isn't required to have any storage, so taking the address of a reference doesn't make sense). int&& is an rvalue reference, which is just a different type of reference. You can't have int & & though. Binding another reference to a reference actually binds to the underlying object, not the reference. So there are no pointers or references to references.
