From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753444AbbJOX7v (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Oct 2015 19:59:51 -0400 Received: from smtprelay0027.hostedemail.com ([216.40.44.27]:59997 "EHLO smtprelay.hostedemail.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751371AbbJOX7u (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Oct 2015 19:59:50 -0400 X-Session-Marker: 6A6F6540706572636865732E636F6D X-Spam-Summary: 2,0,0,,d41d8cd98f00b204,joe@perches.com,:::::::::::::::::,RULES_HIT:41:355:379:541:599:973:988:989:1260:1277:1311:1313:1314:1345:1359:1373:1437:1515:1516:1518:1534:1538:1568:1593:1594:1711:1714:1730:1747:1777:1792:2393:2559:2562:2828:3138:3139:3140:3141:3142:3622:3865:3866:3867:3870:3871:3873:4321:5007:6261:6742:7903:10004:10400:10848:11658:11914:12517:12519:12740:13069:13311:13357:21080,0,RBL:none,CacheIP:none,Bayesian:0.5,0.5,0.5,Netcheck:none,DomainCache:0,MSF:not bulk,SPF:fn,MSBL:0,DNSBL:none,Custom_rules:0:0:0 X-HE-Tag: shop62_559240891f14a X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 1807 Message-ID: <1444953586.22921.0.camel@perches.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] acpi: set return value to const char for some functions From: Joe Perches To: "Moore, Robert" Cc: LABBE Corentin , "Zheng, Lv" , "Wysocki, Rafael J" , "lenb@kernel.org" , "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" , "devel@acpica.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "Box, David E" Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 16:59:46 -0700 In-Reply-To: <94F2FBAB4432B54E8AACC7DFDE6C92E37D9806CC@ORSMSX112.amr.corp.intel.com> References: <1444849635-14456-1-git-send-email-clabbe.montjoie@gmail.com> <94F2FBAB4432B54E8AACC7DFDE6C92E37D9803BD@ORSMSX112.amr.corp.intel.com> <1444875266.2718.37.camel@perches.com> <94F2FBAB4432B54E8AACC7DFDE6C92E37D9806CC@ORSMSX112.amr.corp.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.11-0ubuntu3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2015-10-15 at 19:32 +0000, Moore, Robert wrote: > if you started to use "const" for some methods you usually forced to > use this in most of your code. But the time spent for maintaining > (typing, recompiling when some const is missing, etc.) of > const-correctness in code seems greater than for fixing of possible > (very rare) problems caused by not using of const-correctness at all c is not c++. "seems" is a dubious statement.