Re: Non-null pointers in C/C++?

James Kuyper wrote:
> Angel Tsankov wrote:
> ...
>> If you cast T const* to T*, pass the result to a function that takes
>> T*, and that function changes the pointed-to value, do you get
>> undefined behaviour?
>

> That depends upon whether or not the object pointed at was defined as
> const. The definition of the pointer is irrelevant, only the
> definition of the pointed-at object matters.
[...]

What I meant is passing a pointer to const object to a function that
expects 
a pointer to non-const one and changing the object via the passed-in 
pointer. Taking into account this clarification, I would take your answer
as 
"yes". This leaves one of my previous questions unanswered:

> If your answer is "yes", then why do you bother so much about NULL 
> sneaking into an unnullable pointer and causing undefined behaviour, too

> (which should very, very, really very rarely happen as the explicit cast

> from a nullable pointer to an unnullable one would remind you that you 
> have to check befoure you cast)? 
-- 
comp.lang.c.moderated - moderation address: clcm@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 -- you must
have an appropriate newsgroups line in your header for your mail to be
seen,
or the newsgroup name in square brackets in the subject line.  Sorry.