3 ms·
int* - pointer to int. int const * - pointer to const int. int * const - const pointer to int. int const * const - const pointer to const int. Is that so ha
by n00b101 13y ago
int* - pointer to int.
int const * - pointer to const int.
int * const - const pointer to int.
int const * const - const pointer to const int.
Is that so hard? Those people posting here who think that THIS is the hardest problem in computing should perhaps find a new line of work.
- comex 13y agoExactly: if 'int const * ' were common, it would be relatively clear that const goes after the type of the thing that is const - but the overwhelming use of the alternate form, 'const int *', makes it more confusing what to do.
- n00b101 13y agoconst int * - pointer to const int I see this is as (const int)* foo; which is the same as (int const)* foo; And people prefer const int foo; over int const foo; So it all makes sense in terms of the grammar. Admittedly, it can be difficult to remember, but pointers and const correctness are complicated and combining them is going to be complicated to write out no matter what grammar you use. Even if the grammar was restricted, it's difficult to remember this type of thing and if you encountered such code in the wild and had any doubts about its semantics then you would look it up on Google before modifying it (right?)