This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [PATCH INSTALLED]: const typedefs part 19/N

From: kenner at vlsi1 dot ultra dot nyu dot edu (Richard Kenner)
To: dberlin at dberlin dot org
Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, ghazi at caip dot rutgers dot edu
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 12:28:56 EDT
Subject: Re: [PATCH INSTALLED]: const typedefs part 19/N
References: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0708262352520.25986@caipclassic.rutgers.edu> <4aca3dc20708270733p7181ee8dreb4ca0e804fb8eaf@mail.gmail.com>

> That crosses the line for me from "i don't care if you want to
> constify a bunch of things" to "stop making the code look horrible".
> Really, all something like that will do is confuse people.

I agree.  Adding "const" is valuable, but the benefit of doing so is
relatively small and I don't think it should be done if there is any
significant COST in doing so.  Certainly having to add new function is way
too large a cost to justify that, in my mind, and even adding new lines of
code to do ugly conversions would make me wonder if it were worthwhile.

References:
- [PATCH INSTALLED]: const typedefs part 19/N
  - From: Kaveh R. GHAZI
- Re: [PATCH INSTALLED]: const typedefs part 19/N
  - From: Daniel Berlin

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]