On Nov 30, 2011, at 1:35 PM, David Levin wrote: > All of this seems to apply equally to const_iterator as well.
I don’t think it does. > Are you mildly opposed to it as well? Or is something different about it? It seems to me that const_iterator is analogous to pointer-to-const and const member functions. These are used in WebKit and the issues are different than for const local variables. It’s about whether the pointed-to thing can be changed, not whether a local variable can change. When the thing in question is not local, const is far more valuable. > An additional current downside for const_iterator is that hashtable > const_iterator has an unfortunate issue where it can't be compared ==, != to > an iterator which isn't nice. https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=73370 Sounds easy to fix. -- Darin _______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
