Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 252389
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 11, 20262026-05-11T21:40:26+00:00 2026-05-11T21:40:26+00:00

My co-worker is 0 for 2 on questions he has inspired ( 1 ,

  • 0

My co-worker is 0 for 2 on questions he has inspired (1, 2), so I thought I’d give him a chance to catch up.

Our latest disagreement is over the style issue of where to put “const” on declarations.

He is of the opinion that it should go either in front of the type, or after the pointer. The reasoning is that this is what is typically done by everyone else, and other styles are liable to be confusing. Thus a pointer to a constant int, and a constant pointer to int would be respectively:

const int *i;
      int * const i;

However, I’m confused anyway. I need rules that are consistent and easy to understand, and the only way I can make sense of “const” is that it goes after the thing it is modifying. There’s an exception that allows it to go in front of the final type, but that’s an exception, so it’s easier on me if I don’t use it.

Thus a pointer to a constant int, and a constant pointer to int would be respectively:

int const * i;
int * const i;

As an added benefit, doing things this way makes deeper levels of indirection easier to understand. For example, a pointer to a constant pointer to int would clearly be:

int * const * i;

My contention is that if someone just learns it his way, they’ll have little trouble figuring out what the above works out to.

The ultimate issue here is that he thinks that putting const after int is so unspeakably ugly, and so harmful to readability that it should be banned in the style guide. Of course, I think if anything the guide should suggest doing it my way, but either way we shouldn’t be banning one approach.

Edit:
I’ve gotten a lot of good answers, but none really directly address my last paragraph (“The ultimate issue”). A lot of people argue for consistency, but is that so desirable in this case that it is a good idea to ban the other way of doing it, rather that just discouraging it?

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-11T21:40:26+00:00Added an answer on May 11, 2026 at 9:40 pm

    The most important thing is consistency. If there aren’t any coding guidelines for this, then pick one and stick with it. But, if your team already has a de facto standard, don’t change it!

    That said, I think by far the more common is

    const int * i;
    int * const j;
    

    because most people write

    const int n;
    

    instead of

    int const n;
    

    A side note — an easy way to read pointer constness is to read the declaration starting at the right.

    const int * i; // pointer to an int that is const
    int * const j; // constant pointer to a (non-const) int
    int const * aLessPopularWay; // pointer to a const int
    
    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

This question is a result of a lunch-time conversation with a co-worker...I've read questions
I have a wxPython app which has many worker threads, idle event cycles, and
I know the subject has already been seen on many Questions and has been
I just saw a very odd thing, I have a co-worker who has their
I am using Povray to render images over a cluster. Each worker node is
I have a few questions about web workers Does the worker have access to
BACKGROUND: Co-worker Adam has been using Google refine to process database downloads with much
I have a C program which has multiple worker threads. There is a main
I've seen like 10239218301 other questions about this but NO solution has worked for
I've seen lots of questions and solutions to problems like this but nothing has

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.