On Dec 17, 2007, at 4:17 PM, Paul Johnson wrote:
Which is where, in C++, you would be using the mutable keyword. I
don't
think this has yet made it into any C standard, but my knowledge in
these areas is a little out of date.
No, you can't. Alas. I'm going to have to give up on the CONS
On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 09:50:32PM +, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 10:06:42AM -0600, Andy Lester wrote:
> > Andy: My consting has run into its greatest challenge yet.
> > Andy: Making self args to PMCs consts where appropriate.
> > Andy:
> > Andy: INTVAL such_and_such_elemen
On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 10:06:42AM -0600, Andy Lester wrote:
> Andy: My consting has run into its greatest challenge yet.
> Andy: Making self args to PMCs consts where appropriate.
> Andy:
> Andy: INTVAL such_and_such_elements( PMC *self );
> Andy: Tell me that *self shouldn't be const.
> Andy: Go
Andy: My consting has run into its greatest challenge yet.
Andy: Making self args to PMCs consts where appropriate.
Andy:
Andy: INTVAL such_and_such_elements( PMC *self );
Andy: Tell me that *self shouldn't be const.
Andy: Go on, tell me.
Andy: You can't.
particle: of course i can't
particle: in
