Is there any real reason to use "const"?
acehreli at yahoo.com
Mon Jan 24 17:47:51 UTC 2022
On 1/24/22 08:23, rempas wrote:
> I can understand and agree the cases where people will just make
> mistakes because they are humans
> or because they are coding at a time
> they should be sleeping
That's misleading. Making mistakes is an important part of learning. It
happens all the time. That's why we have processes to follow to protect
ourselves from ourselves. const, unnecessary (!) curly braces, etc. are
parts of such protection.
However, const on the function API is also for communication: It tells
the caller what parameters are not going to be mutated by the function.
But I've become one of the people who advocate 'in' over 'const'
especially when compiled with -preview=in:
Sweet! 'in' even enables passing rvalues by reference! :)
More information about the Digitalmars-d