On Mon, 2009-12-21 at 10:49:32 +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> [...] (arguably strchr should have a return type of ‘const char *’,
> which would not have allowed this to happen in the first place),

Errr, actually, that's not correct, the signature is the way it is so
that one can pass a ‘char *’ knowing strchr will not modify it
internally, but being able to modify the contents of the returned
pointer.

regards,
guillem



_______________________________________________
Pkg-phototools-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-phototools-devel

Reply via email to