https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=122725
Alejandro Colomar <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution|--- |WONTFIX --- Comment #2 from Alejandro Colomar <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Joseph S. Myers from comment #1) > It's far from clear what such scopes would mean when you have multiple > function declarators involved - a function returning a pointer to a function > returning a pointer to a function returning a pointer to function, etc. > (which function's parameters would be referred to, given that each has its > own parameter scope)? Hmmm, I hadn't thought of that case. I agree this is more complex than it looked like. I'll keep working around this with macros with statement expressions. > > I don't think Bugzilla should be used at all for it-would-be-nice-if ideas > unless you first have agreement from maintainers that the idea is actually a > desirable improvement to GCC. I thought it would be useful to have it here, to allow others to find out the reasons why it's not viable if it's not. Or to allow my future self to come back here to remind me of why it's not viable. I'll close as WONTFIX. Thanks!
