From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <019c01c01f08$eecbb1a0$89c584c3@cybercable.fr>
From: "Boyd Roberts" <boyd@planete.net>
To: <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
References: <200009131811.TAA15840@whitecrow.demon.co.uk>, <002301c01e48$24674480$89c584c3@cybercable.fr> <39C0DC0F.F5ECF968@arl.army.mil>
Subject: Re: [9fans] no const?
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2000 13:34:38 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 0803b752-eac9-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

From: "Douglas A. Gwyn" <gwyn@arl.army.mil>
> 
> If the malloced pointer is stored in a properly declared variable,
> then subsequent attempts to modify the pointed-to storage result
> in a diagnostic.  Since the actual dynamic storage is not inherently
> read-only, that is the best that one could hope for from the language.

hope?  i don't see the point of adding a buncha extra code to the
compiler in the 'hope' that things will be better.

> No, complaining serves no purpose.  Critiquing can be useful if
> the analysis uncovers some interesting principles or facts.

oh semantics...