On 02/04/2016 04:14 PM, Richard Henderson wrote: > On 02/04/2016 10:02 PM, Marek Polacek wrote: >>> Do we need matching __auto_type variants? >> >> I think at present __auto_type removes the qualifiers from atomic types only, >> but I'd hope we can just adjust __auto_type to always strip the qualifiers, >> not introduce __auto_type_noqual... > > Exactly what I was thinking.
Sounds right to me. I think it should be a design goal for __auto_type and __typeof to be consistent. GDB's "compile print EXPR" command (what calls gcc through the libcc1 plugin), passes something like this to gcc: __auto_type __gdb_val = EXPR; I believe we may benefit from a __auto_qual_type variant that strips nothing, but I'm not sure.
