RE: [AD] New patch for `const'-correctness

["Vincent Penquerc'h" <vincent@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> > Actually, I don't see why we don't just use `const', then #define it
> > to nothing when it is unavailable.
>
> I agree with you, I think there aren't compilers which don't support const

I don't. GCC has an extension which gets screwed if undefining const.
You can write
void foo() __attribute__((const));
and defining out const will break that.
Basically, it is bad to define out language keywords :)
I remember seeing
#define int long
:)
this would also turn a long int into a long long, which is probably
not what the original coder wanted :)

--
Lyrian