RE: [gnome-db] Patch for const removal

[Rodrigo Moya <rodrigo gnome-db org>]

On Wed, 2003-11-19 at 12:17, Murray Cumming Comneon com wrote:
> > It's not about "let's do it like the cool guys", but "let's 
> > fix it", and I think we all agree the const's in those files 
> > are wrong, even if it's the correct fix semantically speaking.
> 
> Even in C++ it is impossible to use consts correctly according to any rule.
> It depends on what you want the const to mean, and the compiler can not
> enforce even what you want to mean. For years I thought that it could.
> Ref-counting is a good example of this - If I ref it, am I changing it?. You
> get to decide, not the compiler.
> 
> And it's even more difficult in C. If it works, and it doesn't seem
> illogical in the API then I think it's OK.
> 
> The only consistent and workable use of const that I have seen in GNOME is
> on gchar* parameters. Anything else might lead to problems.
> 
right

cheers