>> - char *const *argv; >> + char **argv; > Um. I don't think we can do this with argv. I'm surprised that it > isn't "const char * const * argv".
We can do whatever we want with argv. That's pretty well-established. It wasn't "const char *const *argv" before because a "char **" argument is not compatible with such a parameter, and C programs canonically take "char **argv", not "const char *const *argv". I'm not sure if it's even valid C to silently change from char * to const char * without an explicit cast, which is what you'd be doing if you wrote a main() which accepted a list of const char pointers intead of a list of char pointers. (Branko said this as well, in different words.) > Certainly, if we make a copy of the array (of pointers), then we > could have "const char **argv" and that would allow us to permute. I can do this if you think it's important, but the gnu getopt_long certainly doesn't bother. > I think the name "apr_option_t" is a bit too generic. The > apr_getopt_ prefix probably ought to remain. Okay, will resubmit with that change.
