> While this is technically correct so the compiler does not complain (because
> clocations is a non const pointer in JumbleState and the added const does not
> apply to what clocations points to), I think that adding const here is
> misleading.
Yes, I am not happy with this. I initially thought
Hi,
On Thu, Dec 18, 2025 at 06:44:17PM -0600, Sami Imseih wrote:
> For the second point, since JumbleState can be shared by multiple
> extensions, hooks should receive it as a const pointer. This
> signals read-only intent and prevents extensions from
> accidentally modifying it through the hook.
