Re: [patch] fix CursorSlice wrong const semantics

[Alfredo Braunstein]

Alfredo Braunstein wrote:

> // suppose we want the function to avoid touching the data
> void somefun(CursorSlice const & a)
> {
>         CursorSlice & b = a;

Sorry, should be 

CursorSlice b = a;

:-)

>         b.paragraph().erase();
>         ...
> }

A/