Wait what?? Your third example could just as easily and correctly be: int const **ptr; ^^^^^ this is what is const True, it is a special case w

Wait what?? Your third example could just as easily and correctly be: int const **ptr; ^^^^^ this is what is const True, it is a special case when there is more than one item in the declarator list as to how const applied, but that by itself is secondary to where const goes. Const qualifies the object. Whether the const is applying to the "int" in some way or is an independent type specifier that applies to each declarator is pretty philosophical. I say it's the latter. The fact is, the very allowance of a cv qualifier in the specifier list introduces an inconsistency or imbalance. Ultimately this is one of the ultimate bikeshedding argument. There's no right answer, and appeals to spoken language aren't particularly compelling when bikeshedding C of all languages. This isn't AppleScript. I'm not even terribly interested in this particular point. I'm more interested in quashing the notions that bikeshedded opinions of language syntax have some divine providence. It's just bullshit.