Re: Emacs rewrite in a maintainable language

[David Kastrup]

Oleh Krehel <address@hidden> writes:

> David Kastrup <address@hidden> writes:
>
>>>> Well, people who cannot figure out that "const char" and "char const"
>>>> are the same are not likely to find their way across our code base.  At
>>>> any rate, "const" in C is nuisance-only and not meaning-conveying like
>>>> in C++ where it may take part in disambiguation as well as semantics
>>>> (copy constructor calls behave specially and are very much const &).
>>>>
>>>> So the "confusion" here is restricted to "oh, the compiler does not
>>>> complain?".
>>>
>>> No, the confusion is "which one of these does what I want?".
>>
>> The answer in C is "if the compiler does not complain, it does what I
>> want".
>
> The C compiler doesn't complain:
>
>     mark_object (KVAR (kb, Voverriding_terminal_local_map));

Are we still talking about "const char" vs "char const" or is this just
another parade of the impressive Emacs-devel straw man army?

-- 
David Kastrup