Re: Emacs rewrite in a maintainable language

[David Kastrup]

Artur Malabarba <address@hidden> writes:

> 2015-10-13 15:39 GMT+01:00 David Kastrup <address@hidden>:
>> Artur Malabarba <address@hidden> writes:
>>
>>> On 13 Oct 2015 2:06 pm, "Sergey Organov" <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>> Dunno if enforcing one form or another makes sense.
>>>
>>> It makes sense to prevent inconsistencies and confusion of new
>>> contributors (specially at almost zero cost).
>>
>> Well, people who cannot figure out that "const char" and "char const"
>> are the same are not likely to find their way across our code base.  At
>> any rate, "const" in C is nuisance-only and not meaning-conveying like
>> in C++ where it may take part in disambiguation as well as semantics
>> (copy constructor calls behave specially and are very much const &).
>>
>> So the "confusion" here is restricted to "oh, the compiler does not
>> complain?".
>
> No, the confusion is "which one of these does what I want?".

The answer in C is "if the compiler does not complain, it does what I
want".

-- 
David Kastrup