Am 22.08.15 um 11:20 schrieb Felix Deichmann: > Am 22.08.2015 um 10:15 schrieb Marc Balmer: >> Imo, this patch does not solve a problem, but creates new ones, maybe... >> The constness that you sprinkle is definitely not needed, only makes >> the code cluttered imo. > > This "constness" is mainly adding "pointers to const" in function > arguments and for strings. Some will consider this good style to say the > least (MISRA, CERT C Coding Standard), and some even claim it will allow > for better compiler optimization.
I agree for libraries, but not for tools where such functions are only used internally. And only that some committees consider sth good style does not mandate that I use it. The code is perfectly valid as is and there is no need for such changes. > > CERT has for example: > DCL00-C. Const-qualify immutable objects > DCL13-C. Declare function parameters that are pointers to values not > changed by the function as const > STR05-C. Use pointers to const when referring to string literals > STR30-C. Do not attempt to modify string literals > etc. > > Regards, > Felix
