> Could you elaborate on why we want this? I seem to have misunderstood your qouted comment http://codereview.appspot.com/6477062/#msg5
> Do the consts fail to > compile with some compiler, or are they only supposed to be > included in the C++ files, or...? I faintly remember a version of MSVC++ mishandling these, i.e. handling foo (int) and foo (int const) as different signatures, which was particularly annoying with virtual members. I fear these const's can mislead developers not absolutely up-to-date with all the exact details of the c++ standards. p _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
