<c.s.c++ added>

James Kanze wrote:
>
> Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> writes:
>
> |>  James Kanze wrote:
> |>  [...]
> |>  > The problem is that the choice of the function you call depends on
> |>  > the declaration of the object, not on the use you make of what it
> |>  > returns.
>
> |>  Agreed.
>
> |>  > So if the string object is declared non-const because it has to be
> |>  > set once, before threading starts, you still need the lock.
>
> |>  Not if you access it via "const &".
>
> |>  int read_global_thing() {
> |>    return const_cast<std::string const &>(thing)[0];
> |>  }
>
> So who writes things like that?
>
> I don't have to write something like const_cast< char const*& const >
> when accessing a globale char const*.

Wrong newsgroup. ;-)

regards,
alexander.

---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu    ]
[              --- Please see the FAQ before posting. ---               ]
[ FAQ: http://www.jamesd.demon.co.uk/csc/faq.html                       ]