Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > b. makes it more similar to a return type "string const &", and in
| > combination with a. makes a transition to this type later (if wanted)
| > easier.
|
| Hardly an argument, is it?
Better than "it is too long I can't read it" :-)
Besides return type "string" is shorter than "string const &" and
should give you almost the exact same thing.
| [But if you let me have my will with regard to 'virtual' I'll immediately
| stop quarrelling about the 'const' ;-)]
It not really about my will or your will, but the coders will. I see
no good reasons to not let coders use virtual... except then we should
all do it... so... up for discussion I guess.
--
Lgb
