Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!ncrlnk!ncr-sd!hp-sdd!ucsdhub!ucsd!nosc!helios.ee.lbl.gov!pasteur!ames!mailrus!uflorida!novavax!proxftl!bill
From: bill@proxftl.UUCP (T. William Wells)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: const comparison in C and C++
Message-ID: <805@proxftl.UUCP>
Date: 22 Sep 88 00:33:43 GMT
References: <709@paris.ICS.UCI.EDU> <8500@smoke.ARPA> <1411@solo3.cs.vu.nl> <8516@smoke.ARPA> <785@proxftl.UUCP> <8529@smoke.ARPA>
Reply-To: bill@proxftl.UUCP (T. William Wells)
Organization: Proximity Technology, Ft. Lauderdale
Lines: 25
Summary:
Expires:
Sender:
Followup-To:
Distribution:
Keywords:

In article <8529@smoke.ARPA> gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) ) writes:
: In article <785@proxftl.UUCP> bill@proxftl.UUCP (T. William Wells) writes:
: >In article <8516@smoke.ARPA> gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) ) writes:
: >:       void copy(const char *source, char *destination, unsigned count);
: >: ... modification of any storage validly accessible via
: >: the second parameter is NOT prohibited.
: >Sorry Doug, it's undefined.
:
: Sorry yourself, it's the way I stated.
:
: >"If an attempt is made to modify an object defined with a
: >const-qualified type through use of an lvalue with
: >non-const-qualified type, the behavior is undefined."
:
: This is simply not relevant.  The parameter declarations do not define
: objects.

I see what you mean.  I didn't interpret the "defined with" when
reading the section.  And I'm not *too* sorry because this means
I don't have to go and fix up that copy routine (and a few
others) in our library.  :-)

---
Bill
novavax!proxftl!bill