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.