https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116130
--- Comment #5 from Sam James <sjames at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #4) > BTW, the rule about composite types sounds fairly dangerous in the ?: > operator case. > For redeclarations it is the right thing, but for ?: yielding the union of > the standard attributes will cause problems say on: Clang had this problem before with noreturn in https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/59792#issuecomment-1369314436. https://reviews.llvm.org/D140868#4024060 has discussion of the problematic phrasing.
