From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 10:47:43 +0000 From: "Douglas A. Gwyn" Message-ID: <39C30C12.B34565CA@null.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <200009131811.TAA15840@whitecrow.demon.co.uk>, <019c01c01f08$eecbb1a0$89c584c3@cybercable.fr> Subject: Re: [9fans] no const? Topicbox-Message-UUID: 08338900-eac9-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 Boyd Roberts wrote: > From: "Douglas A. Gwyn" > > 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. Your response has nothing to do with what I said. At this point I have to conclude that your mind is already made up and you don't want to be confused with the facts.