home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: solon.com!not-for-mail
- From: kanze@gabi-soft.fr (J. Kanze)
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c.moderated
- Subject: Re: const pointer confusion...
- Date: 28 Mar 1996 06:47:53 -0600
- Organization: GABI Software, Sarl.
- Sender: clc@solutions.solon.com
- Approved: clc@solutions.solon.com
- Message-ID: <4je1pp$g2r@solutions.solon.com>
- References: <4j06gm$7oa@solutions.solon.com> <4j41io$nma@solutions.solon.com>
- <4j6389$3iq@solutions.solon.com> <4ja3s4$par@solutions.solon.com>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: solutions.solon.com
-
- In article <4jckoq$a32@solutions.solon.com> Lawrence Kirby
- <fred@genesis.demon.co.uk> writes:
-
- |> In article <4ja3s4$par@solutions.solon.com>
- |> kanze@lts.sel.alcatel.de "James Kanze US/ESC 60/3/141 #40763" writes:
-
- |> >I agree about not using any old arbitrary order, but the cv-qualifiers
- |> >should definitly come *after* what they modify. It is only in the
- |> >declaration-specifier that you have any freedom. In the declarator,
- |> >the cv-qualifier *must* follow what it modifies. So why do it any
- |> >differently here.
-
- |> Personally I think it reads more clearly with the qualifier prior to the
- |> type.
-
- Except when it is a pointer that is const, n'est-ce pas? :-)
-
- I'll admit that it somehow `looks' more natural to put the const first,
- at least, until you get used to the other alternative. (This may be
- related to the fact that we put adjectives in front of the noun in
- English, and that we somehow feal that const is an adjective.) I find
- it more consistent to put the const after, however, since I have to do
- so anyway in some cases.
- --
- James Kanze (+33) 88 14 49 00 email: kanze@gabi-soft.fr
- GABI Software, Sarl., 8 rue des Francs Bourgeois, 67000 Strasbourg, France
- Conseils en informatique industrielle --
- -- Beratung in industrieller Datenverarbeitung
-