The main problem would be if there are any out-of-tree users of these routines. Since it's C there's no function overloading, so we can't provide both signatures under the same name. So that means the alternatives are something like: * do nothing * break out-of-tree users * provide the call-by-reference version under a different name probably the out-of-tree users are mythical, but who knows. You'd better speak up in this thread if you are not mythical.
As for why "const *" was not used at the time, the code may predate the wide deployment of C compilers that supported the "const" keyword. If you don't have "const *" then the next best alternative may have been pass-by-value. Jeff ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ October Webinars: Code for Performance Free Intel webinars can help you accelerate application performance. Explore tips for MPI, OpenMP, advanced profiling, and more. Get the most from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60135991&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Emc-developers mailing list Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
