[boost] Re: static_cast and const

From: Jonathan Turkanis (technews_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-09-20 11:27:20

"David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
news:umzzl3pvk.fsf_at_boost-consulting.com...
> Richard Hadsell <hadsell_at_[hidden]> writes:
>
> > Jonathan Turkanis wrote:
> >
> >>When I was writing it I initially typed 'const_cast', but then thought to
> >>myself: why use my big guns if I don't have to?  ;-)
> >>
> > For clarity -- to tell the reader that you intended to modify the
> > const-ness.
>
> static_cast is a bigger gun than const_cast.  At least const_cast
> cant violate data layout, and unless there is actually a constant
> object, won't result in undefined behavior.

Good point. I guess part of the reason I avoid const_cast whenever possible is
that people look upon it suspiciously, even if it's only adding
cv-qualification. Maybe people should be more suspicious of static_cast.

Jonathan