Re: [boost] [type_traits][function_types] Discard param const qualification, bug or feature?

On Tue, 01 Oct 2013 03:22:10 -0700, Rob Stewart wrote:

On Sep 30, 2013, at 9:46 PM, Mostafa wrote:

...

On Mon, 30 Sep 2013 14:20:40 -0700, Jonathan Wakely wrote:

...

On 30 September 2013 21:53, Mostafa wrote:

...

...

Why do you choose a different "efficient type" for an 'int' parameter vs a 'const int' parameter?

You're most likely reading this message out of context. If you start with Sergey's response it'll probably make more sense.

No, I've read the whole thread.

It sounds like your code to generate signatures has a bug and doesn't model the rules of C++.

I repeat: Why would you choose a different "efficient type" for an 'int' parameter vs a 'const int' parameter?

Let me rephrase that. int and int const are passed from the caller to the function by value. What the function does with the parameters is immaterial to the caller, so why would you treat them differently when forwarding them?

See my last response to Gavin.