Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 13:01:39 -0400 From: Barney Wolff <barney@tp.databus.com> To: Ruslan Ermilov <ru@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: Igor M Podlesny <poige@morning.ru>, net@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: patch -- An ingress filter (RFC2827) Message-ID: <20020426130139.A34980@tp.databus.com> In-Reply-To: <20020426164427.GA82505@sunbay.com>; from ru@FreeBSD.ORG on Fri, Apr 26, 2002 at 07:44:27PM %2B0300 References: <20020414180447.A93954@mars-gw.morning.ru> <20020426091620.GA18917@sunbay.com> <20020426213657.D85230@mars-gw.morning.ru> <20020426164427.GA82505@sunbay.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
When did this change? "const char *ptr" used to mean that the thing pointed to cannot be changed, but the pointer itself can be. So far as I know, it still does. Educate me, please, if that's no longer so. On Fri, Apr 26, 2002 at 07:44:27PM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > > > 3. Double `const' doesn't do any good. (I was once confused about this too.) > > > > (const char *const ptr? > > > > Why? I deem `const' can't make a code worse, only better, cause it makes an > > additional description of variables/functions/code/algo...) > > > Because this is merely equivalent to "const char *ptr". -- Barney Wolff I never met a computer I didn't like. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020426130139.A34980>