| Re: [AD] Update on `const' |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.liballeg.org/allegro-developers Archives
]
On Tue, 18 Dec 2001, Lo'oRiS il Kabukimono wrote:
> > char* get_filename(char* path);
>
> sorry if what i say sounds stupid, but i really never understood why
> a function that takes a read-write pointer should *also* return it.
> for me it sounds useless, and should be nicer if it returned something
> else (*) ... it there a reason (i mean a good reason :) for this behaviour?
It returns filename portion of path argument, what's wrong with it?
Have a nice day.
Stepan Roh