Paul Eggert wrote on 2005-11-18: > I prefer putting type qualifiers like "const" after the types they > modify, as that's more consistent. ... > > Not everyone agrees with this style, but I suspect this is often > because they haven't thought through the consistency issues.
While I know that "char const *" is more consistent, I prefer to use "const char *", because it's an idiom that most C programmer know and understand. Like the parsing of natural language, the parsing of a C program by a human is largely based on idioms, and "const char *" meaning "string" is such an idiom. It's the same reason why I use 'bool' (rather than 'unsigned char' or '_Bool') to denote a boolean value: it's the common idiom for this type, therefore using that idiom - rather than rolling your own - makes programs more readable. Bruno _______________________________________________ bug-gnulib mailing list bug-gnulib@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnulib
