* Kalle Olavi Niemitalo <kon@xxxxxx> wrote:
> Although the second parameter is const void *, the language still
> allows the function to modify the object to which that points,
> provided that the object was not defined as const.
Doesn't that defeat the whole purpose of const ?
BTW: let me add another question:
const std::string str;
void one(const std::string s)
{
str = s;
}
void two(const char* s)
{
one(s);
}
void three()
{
two("hello world");
}
What actually happens here under the hood ? Is this reliable ?
(lifetime of the string object)
cu
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT service -- http://www.metux.de/
phone: +49 36207 519931 email: weigelt@xxxxxxxx
mobile: +49 151 27565287 icq: 210169427 skype: nekrad666
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Embedded-Linux / Portierung / Opensource-QM / Verteilte Systeme
----------------------------------------------------------------------
