HOWTO: const and pointer variants in C and C++ : c++

Application Development · #31 11-11-2008, 07:01 PM

James Kuyper wrote:
> pete wrote:
>> Hendrik Schober wrote:
>>> pete wrote:
>>>> [...]
>>>> I don't think that removing const
>>>> ever changes the semantics of a program.
>>>
>>> struct test {
>>> int f() {return 1;}
>>> int f() const {return 0;}
>>> };
>>>
>>> int main()
>>> {
>>> /*const*/ test x;
>>> return x.f();
>>> }
>>
>> In order to make a point,
>> you would have to post a correct c program
>
> In case you haven't noticed, this message is cross-posted to two groups
> where C++ code is entirely appropriate;

I hadn't noticed.

> the Subject: line might also be a hint.

--
pete

Application Development · #32 11-11-2008, 07:20 PM

Flash Gordon wrote:
> Pete Becker wrote, On 11/11/08 20:24:
>> On 2008-11-11 15:16:00 -0500, Flash Gordon <smap@spam.causeway.com> said:
>>
>>> James Kuyper wrote, On 11/11/08 19:12:
>>>> pete wrote:
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>>> In order to make a point,
>>>>> you would have to post a correct c program
>>>> In case you haven't noticed, this message is cross-posted to two groups
>>>> where C++ code is entirely appropriate; the Subject: line might also be
>>>> a hint.
>>> It is also posted to a group where C++ is NOT topical. The way pete
>>> indicated this might not be the best, but it is certainly true that the
>>> example given was not correct for comp.lang.c where only C is topical.
>>> Is it really too difficult for people with C++ specific answers to drop
>>> the cross-post to comp.lang.c?
>> It's no more difficult than for people with comments about the
>> appropriateness of postings in comp.lang.c to drop the cross-post to
>> comp.lang.c++.
>
> I had not registered that it was James Kuyper, who does read
> comp.lang.c, who made the comment above about it being topical in two of
> the groups this is cross-posted to. Sorry. If I had registered I would
> have dropped the cross-post.

I think that a comparison between C and C++ with regard to 'const' and
pointers should be on-topic in all three groups, but that everyone
involved in such a discussion should be careful to distinguish which
language they're talking about at any given point in the discussion,
except when making a statement that they believe to be true in both
languages.

Application Development · #33 11-11-2008, 07:20 PM

Flash Gordon wrote:
> Pete Becker wrote, On 11/11/08 20:24:
>> On 2008-11-11 15:16:00 -0500, Flash Gordon <smap@spam.causeway.com> said:
>>
>>> James Kuyper wrote, On 11/11/08 19:12:
>>>> pete wrote:
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>>> In order to make a point,
>>>>> you would have to post a correct c program
>>>> In case you haven't noticed, this message is cross-posted to two groups
>>>> where C++ code is entirely appropriate; the Subject: line might also be
>>>> a hint.
>>> It is also posted to a group where C++ is NOT topical. The way pete
>>> indicated this might not be the best, but it is certainly true that the
>>> example given was not correct for comp.lang.c where only C is topical.
>>> Is it really too difficult for people with C++ specific answers to drop
>>> the cross-post to comp.lang.c?
>> It's no more difficult than for people with comments about the
>> appropriateness of postings in comp.lang.c to drop the cross-post to
>> comp.lang.c++.
>
> I had not registered that it was James Kuyper, who does read
> comp.lang.c, who made the comment above about it being topical in two of
> the groups this is cross-posted to. Sorry. If I had registered I would
> have dropped the cross-post.

I think that a comparison between C and C++ with regard to 'const' and
pointers should be on-topic in all three groups, but that everyone
involved in such a discussion should be careful to distinguish which
language they're talking about at any given point in the discussion,
except when making a statement that they believe to be true in both
languages.