On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 1:53 PM, Pal Engstad <[email protected]>wrote:

> Well, the problem is akin to using a pointer as an argument to a function
> accepting a const-pointer (in C++), which is an error. I would expect BitC
> to be at least as stringent!


const pointer or pointer to const?
_______________________________________________
bitc-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev

Reply via email to