On Friday 29 July 2011 15:58:14 Steven Schveighoffer wrote: > On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 15:47:55 -0400, KennyTM~ <[email protected]> wrote: > > Comments: > > > > - pathSplitter: empty, front, back could be const. > > I know it seems like "if it could be const, we should mark it const", but > does it always make sense? I mean, consider this example. Should > front/back/empty be const? What are ever the chance that someone has a > const range? Consider that a const range is near useless (it can't do > it's primary function -- iterate). > > Just wondering...
I'd generally argue that if it can be const, it should be const. So, it's probably better to make empty, front, and back const. However, const functions _range_ rather pointless for ranges. So, I'm not really sure that it matters. It could go either way. - Jonathan M Davis
