Re: How do I write directly to a memory address?

[Maciej Sobczak <see.my.homepage@gmail.com>]

On Feb 7, 10:24 am, "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mail...@dmitry-kazakov.de>
wrote:

> > The contract is not broken. The function cannot modify the original
> > value that is passed by copy (this being the very nature of "copy")
> > and the caller cannot even reason about what happens behind the
> > signature.
>
> It is broken because const T is not substitutable for T. Mutators of the
> type T are not operations of const T. q.e.d.

q.e.d. what?

I have an impression that we are (again) in the mode where you bring
arbitrarily twisted definitions in order to prove your point.

What contract is broken?

Why do you want to substitute one type by another? These are not
generics, nor other type-dependent constructs, so type substitutions
are out of the picture.

Or (because I have no idea what is your point, so I'm guessing), you
can easily use const T to provide the actual value for the parameter
of T:

void foo(int i);

and then:

const int j = 7;
foo(j);

Type substitution does not happen here. The types interact by means of
initialization, but this interaction has nothing to do with
substitution.

So, no contract is broken. (q.e.d.?)

Unless, of course, you have meant something else.

--
Maciej Sobczak * http://www.inspirel.com