🚀 go-pugleaf

[Moderator's note: This is crossposted to comp.std.c++ and
comp.lang.c++, and followups have been set to comp.std.c++. mha]

I recently came across a piece of code that reads:

class A {
  // contents of class A
} a1, *a2, const *a3;


This looks pretty bogus to me.  I thought that the 'const' applied
to the elaborated specifier 'class A'.  If the 'const' qualifier is
supposed to apply to the pointer in 'a3', then it should come _after_
the '*'.

I think that either one of the two following was intended.

1)

class A {
  // contents of class A
} a1, *a2, * const a3;


2)

class A {
  // contents of class A
} a1, *a2;

A const *a3;  // Or const A *a3;


Is my interpretation of the binding of 'const' more or less correct?

BTW, this code _is_ accepted by the Microsoft VC/C++ v2.0 compiler.


-- 
 Aaron S. Binns 	                 Reliable Software Technologies Corp.
                        	         21515 Ridgetop Circle, Suite 250
 asbinn@rstcorp.com             	 Sterling, VA 20166
					http://www.rstcorp.com
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles: Try just posting with your 
                newsreader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu
  comp.std.c++ FAQ: http://reality.sgi.com/austern/std-c++/faq.html
  Moderation policy: http://reality.sgi.com/austern/std-c++/policy.html
  Comments? mailto:std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu 
]