Liam Beguin [off-list ref] writes:
Since this came up, would it be a good thing to add -Wignored-qualifiers
to the DEVELOPER flags?
Quite frankly, I am not sure if catching that particular warning
violation buys us much. As a return value from a function is never
an lvalue, what triggers the warning may certainly be an indication
of a sloppy coding, but otherwise I do not see it as diagnosing a
potential error. "The programmer thought that the returned value
will only be assigned to a const variable and will never be
modified, but the language does not guarantee such a behaviour out
of the caller"---does such an incorrect expectation lead to an error
in the codepath that involves such a function?