On May 25, 2017 1:38:36 PM GMT+02:00, Nathan Sidwell <nat...@acm.org> wrote: >On 05/25/2017 07:21 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > >> I don't mind removing the warning again if preferred. I thought it >was >> useful (as we already warn for ignored const in return types). > >Oh yeah, I recall noticing we did that (and noting we didn't warn >elsewhere). This new warning seems consistent. > >I say leave it in unless the grumbling gets too much for you :)
I wonder if we can somehow default to -Wno-error=xyz for such kind of 'style' warnings... Adding const can't possibly break anything or result in wrong expectations, can it? Richard. >nathan
