home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: solon.com!not-for-mail
- From: Lawrence Kirby <fred@genesis.demon.co.uk>
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c.moderated
- Subject: Re: const pointer confusion...
- Date: 1 Apr 1996 19:54:14 -0600
- Organization: none
- Sender: clc@solutions.solon.com
- Approved: clc@solutions.solon.com
- Message-ID: <4jq1c6$a06@solutions.solon.com>
- References: <4j06gm$7oa@solutions.solon.com> <4j41io$nma@solutions.solon.com> <4je1pp$g2r@solutions.solon.com>
- Reply-To: fred@genesis.demon.co.uk
- NNTP-Posting-Host: solutions.solon.com
- X-NNTP-Posting-Host: genesis.demon.co.uk
- X-Newsreader: Demon Internet Simple News v1.27
- X-Mail2News-Path: genesis.demon.co.uk
-
- In article <4je1pp$g2r@solutions.solon.com> kanze@gabi-soft.fr "J. Kanze" writes:
-
- >In article <4jckoq$a32@solutions.solon.com> Lawrence Kirby
- ><fred@genesis.demon.co.uk> writes:
-
- >|> 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'm with Kazimir on this one - I just don't think of a declarator in the
- same terms as a declaration specifier.
-
- --
- -----------------------------------------
- Lawrence Kirby | fred@genesis.demon.co.uk
- Wilts, England | 70734.126@compuserve.com
- -----------------------------------------
-