Joern Rennecke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Having another copy of note_stores seems simpler and is certainly > more portable. > What do you think about the name walk_stores?
Following this approach strictly leads to considerable code duplication, which makes people unhappy. If you want to make an argument for just using it for note_stores, I'm willing to listen. I think the new name should be tied to note_stores, though--e.g., note_stores_nonconst. It's definitely a problem in C that some functions reasonably take const pointers in some cases and non-const pointers in other cases. But I think it's a well understood problem, and I think CONST_CAST_RTX, or small structures, are acceptable approaches. Obviously if we had to use CONST_CAST_RTX everywhere something would be wrong, but I only count six uses in the core code right now, which seems like an acceptable compromise. Ian
