Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
Matthew Woehlke wrote:
Ah, yes, inline better than macro :-). I'd note that, from your example
usage, it sounds like your return should also be const.
No, we have to return non-const, because many uses of this
macro/function are putting the result in a non-const variable. Returning
non-const is safe even if the lvalue accepting the result is const, but
the reverse generates a warning.
Yes, but if you're feeding const strings into something that strips the
const to avoid a warning, then you're ignoring the warning at your own
peril. You'd do better to make your code correctly const-safe. If you
have legitimate instances where the result both needs to be non-const,
and really /is/ non-const, then you might want to consider making a
second version, so you have two versions, one all-const, and one
all-non-const.
--
Matthew
Please do not quote my e-mail address unobfuscated in message bodies.
--
No .sig for you! NEXT! -- Unknown
