begin quoting Christopher Smith as of Sun, Oct 01, 2006 at 12:39:25AM -0700: > Stewart Stremler wrote: > > Contrary users may do whatever they please; trying to get around a > > contrary user only makes a language ugly. (For example, "const". Ugh.) > > > > It's not my desire to keep the user from ever doing something stupid; only > > to keep the user from doing something stupid by accident. > > These two statements don't seem to make sense. const doesn't stop you > from doing anything (one can always perform a const cast), it just makes > it hard to do something by accident.
You can get around consts with enough work, yes, but you're not *supposed* to be able to do so. I've been told (despite providing evidence to the contrary) that you _can't_ get around const -- the compiler won't LET you. And that's certainly the *intent*. I find consts make it hard to do something, full stop. Plus, they're like "static" in Java -- if they aren't let in under extremely controlled conditions, they breed, and infect *everything*. -Stewart -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-lpsg
