Michel Fortin wrote: > On 2010-11-26 09:12:53 -0500, Jens Mueller <jens.k.muel...@gmx.de> said: > > >So how do you like it to be? > >void foo(const(int)*, char *, const(float)*); > >or > >void foo(const int*, char *, const float*); > > > >I still like the fixed original one namely > >void foo(const(int)*, char *, const float*); > > I don't really have a preference. Note that for function arguments, > you can also use 'in' to mean const: > > void foo(in int*, char *, in float*); > > My opinion is that we have too much choice. When everyone can write > the same thing differently it can easily become confusing.
Right. Definitely too much choice. So it becomes a matter of style and I think the documentation should be in one consistent style. For interfacing with C I prefer the const version over in. Because I consider in and out to be like one pair of shoes. And since out doesn't make sense when interfacing with C I don't like it. But for non interfacing code one should use in/out because they are more explicit than const. Jens