Re: typedefs and structs

[Vadim Lobanov <vlobanov@speakeasy.net>]

On Thu, 10 Nov 2005, Andreas Schwab wrote:

> Vadim Lobanov <vlobanov@speakeasy.net> writes:
>
> > However, if the code is as follows:
> > 	void foo (void) {
> > 		int myvar = 0;
> > 		printf("%d\n", myvar);
> > 		bar(&myvar);
> > 		printf("%d\n", myvar);
> > 	}
> > If bar is declared in _another_ file as
> > 	void bar (const int * var);
> > then I think the compiler can validly cache the value of 'myvar' for the
> > second printf without re-reading it. Correct/incorrect?
>
> Incorrect. bar() may cast away const.  In C const does not mean readonly.

In that case, I stand corrected.

Is there any real reason to apply const to pointer targets, aside from
giving yourself a warning in the case you try to write the pointer
target directly? Seems to be a missed opportunity for optimizations
where the coder designates that it's okay to do so.

> Andreas.
>
> --
> Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, schwab@suse.de
> SuSE Linux Products GmbH, Maxfeldstraße 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
> PGP key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756  01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
> "And now for something completely different."
>

-Vadim Lobanov
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/