https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=116931
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Matt Bentley from comment #2) > Enlighten me here, how is this invalid C++ code? > Because a typedef should mean that int_pointer is int *, so it should work, > right? > If it's invalid merely because it's typedef'd instead of verbatim, it's a > language defect. It is invalid the same way `const int const` is a duplicate const qualifier.
