🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1990May26.164834.4211@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> norvell@csri.toronto.edu (Theo Norvell) writes:

>>Perhaps you mean
>>	void DISALLOW( const int (*const mat)[2] )
>>But this is UGLY.

It's as ugly as any other solution, and as ugly as most of C.

>>Is the following a solution?
>>	typedef const int const_matrix[2][2] ;
>>	...
>>	void DISALLOW( const const_matrix mat )
>>If not, I'm sure someone will point out why.

This is also valid.
But you know the net.  Even if it's a solution, we can still trust
someone to point out why it isn't.  ;-)
In article <1359@crabcake> zhu@crabcake.cs.jhu.edu (Benjamin Zhu) writes:
>	Nope. In this case, "const" has been used twice, i.e., it
>	is duplicatedly declared, which I believe is illegal in
>	Ansi stardard.  Moreover, I fail to notice any semantical
>	difference between "const_matrix" and "const const_matrix".
>	Maybe you mean something else?
Mr. Zhu, you have gotten this one wrong twice.  Looks like you should
take a vacation from answering questions, until you're more alert.

typedef const int const_matrix[2][2] ;
means that a variable of type const_matrix will have constant elements.
void DISALLOW( const const_matrix mat )
means that the pointer "mat" is a constant pointer.
So the result is a constant pointer to constant elements.
The two "const"s do not duplicate each other.

-- 
Norman Diamond, Nihon DEC     diamond@tkou02.enet.dec.com
Proposed group comp.networks.load-reduction:  send your "yes" vote to /dev/null.