------- Additional Comments From joseph at codesourcery dot com 2005-03-01 16:56 ------- Subject: Re: error generated for storage class specified for function parameter
On Tue, 1 Mar 2005, schlie at comcast dot net wrote: > - unless I misunderstand the question, the only way a pointer itself would > be stored in ROM were if it were itself a static const value, and in turn > would itself need to be referenced by a (static const *), where once > referenced, (i.e. the pointer's value is now in a non-static variable) so > it itself never be further qualified (I think)? Just as you can have "char *" and "char *const" and "const char *" and "const char *const", you can have "ROM pointer to ROM" and "ROM pointer to RAM" and "RAM pointer to ROM" and "RAM pointer to RAM", and similarly with more levels of indirection. If you want to handle address spaces properly, look at DTR 18037 (or the final TR once the subclause numbering has been agreed with ISO). There is no bug here, although making GCC handle multiple address spaces properly in the manner described in DTR 18037 might be useful for some targets. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20258
