In C++ it\'s recommended to have const-correctness everywhere. But s开发者_JAVA技巧ince in .Net world, the string content cannot be changed, (new string will be created), do I still write String^ cons
I\'m a bit confused what happened in the following code: 开发者_开发技巧 const int e = 2; int* w = ( int* ) &e;// (1) cast to remove const-ness
I have a class which has a private attribute vector rectVec; class A { private: vector<Rect> rectVec;
I have a function that receives float** as an argument, and I开发者_开发技巧 tried to change it to take const float**.
About six years ago, a software engineer named Harri Porten wrote this article, asking the question, \"When should a member function have a const qualifier and when shouldn\'t it?\" I found it to be t
I recently had an exchange with another C++ developer about the following use of const: void Foo(const int bar);
This question is related to my last one. I am trying to solve the problem usingtraits<T>and traits<T*>. Please consider the following code.
There are many questions discussing the details of C and C++ dealing with pointer-to-const deletion, namely that free() does not accept them and that delete and delete[] do and that constness doesn\'t
Please consider the following code. struct foo { }; template<typename T> class test { public: test() {}
It is legal to convert a pointer-to-non-const to a pointer-to-const. Then why isn\'t it legal to convert a pointer to pointer to non-con开发者_如何学Pythonst to a pointer to pointer to const?
加载中,请稍侯......