On 9 October 2012 18:22, Anthony Toft <toftat@cowshed.us> wrote:

> Not sure that I've ever wanted a const pointer other than "int p[2];"
>
> What would you use it for?
>

We can make sure a function never screws up a pointer causing hard to debug
bugs... For example:

void foo ( int * const p ) {
   *p =3D 1234; // works great
   p++; // hey, we do not want to do that! Error!
}

main () {
  int myInt;
  int anotherInt;

  foo ( &myInt );
  foo ( &anotherInt );
}

$ gcc -o testConstPointer testConstPointer.c
testConstPointer.c: In function =91foo=92:
testConstPointer.c:5: error: increment of read-only location



>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: piclist-bounces@mit.edu [mailto:piclist-bounces@mit.edu] On Behalf
> Of
> V G
> Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2012 20:04
> To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public.
> Subject: Re: [OT] C/C++ pointer syntax
>
> Another case. What if you want to declare a const pointer like so: int *
> const p;?
>
> int *const p; looks weird, and it's illogical. How would you even go abou=
t
> trying to justify why the asterisk is touching the const keyword?
>
> int* const p; looks better.
>
> int * const p; looks the best
> --
> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your
> membership
> options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
>
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
>



--=20
int main() { char *a,*s,*q; printf(s=3D"int main() { char *a,*s,*q;
printf(s=3D%s%s%s, q=3D%s%s%s%s,s,q,q,a=3D%s%s%s%s,q,q,q,a,a,q); }",
q=3D"\"",s,q,q,a=3D"\\",q,q,q,a,a,q); }
--=20
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.