>
> > This was deliberate - I did that originally and I got a compile warning
> as
> > one is const WCHAR * and one is const WCHAR[2] (Not sure if that error
> was
> > from a MSVC windows or Linux compile, but I was trying to avoid it, and a
> > typecast was a bit pointless as the above is accurate as well, isnt it?)
>
> You could declare it non-const.  That's often what we end up doing in
> the tests, that or casting away the const.
>
>
Whats the difference between a typecast and &var[0]?

Jason


Reply via email to