Constants as Function Parameters: 'const int' vs. 'int const'
In C , the seemingly similar parameter declarations of const int and int const have distinct implications for function behavior.
Consider the following functions:
<code class="c++">int testfunc1(const int a) { return a; } int testfunc2(int const a) { return a; }</code>
To understand the difference, it's helpful to read the declarations right-to-left:
const int a = 1; // "a is an integer which is constant" int const a = 1; // "a is a constant integer"
In both cases, a represents a constant value that cannot be modified within the function. However, the order of the keywords defines whether the constant defines the type or the variable:
Therefore, these two functions are not interchangeable. In testfunc1, the value of a is protected from unexpected changes, while in testfunc2, both the value and the type are immutable.
This distinction becomes particularly important in more complex declarations like these:
<code class="c++">const char *s; // "s is a pointer to a char that is constant" char c; char *const t = &c; // "t is a constant pointer to a char"</code>
By reading the declarations backwards, we can determine that:
This distinction in the order of keywords allows for fine-grained control over how data is handled within functions, ensuring both code clarity and predictable behavior.
The above is the detailed content of C Function Parameters: What\'s the Difference Between `const int` and `int const`?. For more information, please follow other related articles on the PHP Chinese website!