Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 17:20:57 +0200 (IST) From: Nadav Eiron <nadav@barcode.co.il> To: Sean Kelly <kelly@fsl.noaa.gov> Cc: Gary Kline <kline@tera.com>, FreeBSD Questions Mailgroup <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: interpretation? Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.91.961016171607.7138A-100000@gatekeeper.barcode.co.il> In-Reply-To: <326451D7.41C67EA6@fsl.noaa.gov>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 15 Oct 1996, Sean Kelly wrote: > Gary Kline wrote: > > > Can any resident C wizard interpret this parameter definition for me? > > > > > localtime(const time_t * const timep) > > You might want a C++ wizard. > > timep is a constant pointer to a constant time_t object. > > > And, is there a simpler way of saying the same thing? time_t is > > a long int. Thanks for any lucid translation.... > > So long as locatime() promises to not modify the object pointed to by > timep, then locatime(time_t* timep) is simpler. > Yeah, but may not work if you'll try passing a const to it. Borland C++ for one (haven't had much experience with gcc lately) will not let you convert a const <smthg> * const var to a non-const one. This means that if you already have a variable declared as const time_t x you won't be able to pass its address to a routine that is declared as localtime (time_t * timep) > -- > Sean Kelly > NOAA Forecast Systems Laboratory > Boulder Colorado USA > Nadav
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.91.961016171607.7138A-100000>