------- Comment #2 from bangerth at math dot tamu dot edu 2008-04-26 00:01 ------- Subject: Re: "type qualifiers ignored" warning
> This warning is correct, and not really bogus as the qualification is ignored > on the return value here even though not explicitly written by the user in the > function declaration. No, sure, I fully understand that the 'const' is ignored here. What I'm saying is that this just happens to be a harmless side effect of the way I write the template. The point is that I need to write it this way so I can use classes in place of S that define value_type not as PODs, but as references or similar things. This is one of those warnings that simply make no sense with templates. W. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36052
