Re: [patch] const_cast to be replaced by str_unconst

On Tue, Apr 12, 2005 at 08:28:50PM +0200, Roland Illig wrote:
> Pavel Tsekov wrote:
> >>For those of you that are concerned about the performance loss of an
> >>extra function call: It is much more important for the code to be
> >>readable and checkable by the compiler than to be 1 millisecond faster
> >>at all.
> >
> >You can inline it.
> When compiling with gcc using -Wcast-qual, this would give us a warning 
> for every file.
static inline unconst***() { ... }
in the header file and be fine.
of course you need a configure check that optionally #defines inline to

Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into your ~/.signature, please!
Chaos, panic, and disorder - my work here is done.

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]