On Sat, 7 Jun 2025, Martin Uecker wrote:
> Checking assertion revealed that we sometimes produce
> composite types with incorrect qualifiers, e.g. the example
>
> int f(int [_Atomic]);
> int f(int [_Atomic]);
> int f(int [_Atomic]);
>
> was rejected because atomic was lost in the second declarat
These three small patches fix some inconsistencies
related to composite type which became apparent when moving
the checking assertion. The first two are small fixes,
while the third proposes to add a helper function
for removing qualifers except atomic to make the code
more robust.
Bootstrappe
