🚀 go-pugleaf

John Winters <john@polo.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <1995Sep7.094751.4404@dcs.warwick.ac.uk>,
>Zefram <A.Main@dcs.warwick.ac.uk> wrote:
>>Indeed.  That's the effect of the const.
>
>Not quite.  That's the effect of them being two identical string literals.
>The compiler is entitled to coalesce the string literals
>whether or not the things pointing to them are const.  (Or perhaps
>you meant one of the later consts?)

I meant that the implementation you showed is permitted because the
objects in question (arrays of characters) are const.  The way I wrote
it, with separate arrays, it could still be implemented the way you
wrote it.  My point is that string literals are effectively arrays of
const char, which is what permits the compiler to coalesce identical
strings.  Though they have type char *, they are effectively const char
*, as if they were all implicitly cast to char *.

-zefram