Re: const correctness

Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
 
>> No, version 2 of the patch used the strchr() technique and has
>> *zero* new functions and *zero* new macros.
> 
> Right.  I was referring to the non-strchr() approach in the
> initial patch.
 
I'm sorry that I misunderstood you.
 
So, I don't think I've heard any argument against version 2 of this
patch.  Does anyone oppose this version?  Is any committer willing
to commit it?  I'm not sure there's much point putting it into the
CF application, since in spot-checks of object files I thought were
most likely to be affected, I found that identical object code was
generated.  It seems to be strictly a matter of whether the code is
more or less readily understood with the patch applied.
 
-Kevin