On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 4:01 PM, Michael Caisse
Emil Dotchevski wrote:
On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 3:03 PM, Robert Ramey
wrote: Emil Dotchevski wrote:
Either way, why does it matter if we're dealing with a pointer-to-const? It doesn't.
The error/warning or whatever for using a "const" is unrelated to this. It's being considered what it means to load a pointer to a const object and whether or not this should be trapped. This is the subject of a Track Item.
This is not a pointer to a const object. It is a const pointer to a mutable object.
A const* ptr_to_item_in_B_items;
is a pointer to a constant (immutable) A
I wrote it wrong in my previous post and it confused you, I meant to say that we have a pointer-to-const that points a mutable object. In other words, you can't modify the object through that pointer but when the pointer is serialized there is no need to modify the object through the pointer because in all cases the serialization library has another pointer to the same object. Emil Dotchevski Reverge Studios, Inc. http://www.revergestudios.com/reblog/index.php?n=ReCode