Re: Emacs rewrite in a maintainable language

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 11:46:30 +0000
> From: Alan Mackenzie <address@hidden>
> Cc: Paul Eggert <address@hidden>, address@hidden
> 
> > May I ask if there's a reason to not have a single style for const
> > pointers? I get 2162 occurrences of "const char *", and 357 occurrences
> > of "char const *" in the C sources.
> 
> Yes there is.  The two are semantically different.  In one of them, it is
> the pointer which is declared constant.  In the other, it's what's
> pointed at that's constant.  Though I can never remember which is which.
> :-(

Use 'cdecl':

  cdecl> explain const char *p
  declare p as pointer to const char
  cdecl> explain char const *p
  syntax error
  cdecl> explain char * const p
  declare p as const pointer to char