On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, David Schwartz wrote:
>
> No, that's not what it means. It has nothing to do with memory. It has to do
> with logical state.
Blah. That's just your own made-up explanation of what you think "const"
should mean. It has no logical background or any basis in the C language.
"const" has nothing to do with "logical state". It has one meaning, and
one meaning only: the compiler should complain if that particular type is
used to do a write access.
It says nothing at all about the "logical state of the object". It cannot,
since a single object can - and does - have multiple pointers to it.
So your standpoint not only has no relevant background to it, it's also
not even logically consistent.
Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
