"Jelte Fennema-Nio" <[email protected]> writes:
> On Tue Mar 17, 2026 at 3:39 AM CET, Tom Lane wrote:
>> While this version of clang doesn't like typeof_unqual, it does take
>> __typeof_unqual__. So maybe we were premature to decide that we
>> could prefer the typeof_unqual spelling.
> Hmmm, that makes sense. How about this patch to at least keep the
> all the logic related to this in one place? I was able to reproduce this
> error using the following flags, and this fixes the issue for me.
Seems reasonable, and I confirm that this fixes things for me on
Fedora 43.
regards, tom lane
