Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Tim Rentsch Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++ Subject: Re: I think references should have been const by default Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2021 06:34:36 -0700 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 6 Message-ID: <86sfwkdker.fsf@linuxsc.com> References: <87bl3d2dx2.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="b7f56eff5ad6c7d9130605d054ce58ef"; logging-data="5278"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19XiU2Ga2EIHpNKAk604ZO5eLNJh9c0hHU=" User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.4 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:4DSX1R7B0bDNa08CxnaO5a7Kzwk= sha1:aRJ/3Fb1C5DThSZGGfLUcxpC3T8= Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c++:82175 Juha Nieminen writes: > There's literally zero reason not to use 'const' for pointers that > are not intended to be used to modify the values they are pointing to. There is literally zero chance that this statement is not hyperbole.