foo const & vs. const foo &

[Jon Trowbridge <trow emccta com>]

Since we've been discussing style concerning the pros and cons of
"unsigned", I've got another one for you.  I've noticed that Asger
(and now Mikkel) write const references and pointers as

  foo const &
  foo const *

whereas everyone else I've ever seen (include Stroustrup and the
authors of the .h files distributed with egcs) would write the same
type as

  const foo &
  const foo *

What is the origin of/motivation for this alternative syntax?  Is
there anything that makes it preferable to the more standard form?

-JT