Re: So You Think You Can Const?

On 09/01/2025 02:04, Ben Bacarisse wrote:

Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> writes:

<snip>

My idea (but I would think this is pretty "canonical" and, if it isn't, I
am missing the mark) is: my public functions take/give "sealed" instances
(with const members to const data), as the user is not supposed to directly
manipulate/edit the data, OTOH of course my implementation is all about
in-place editing...

 See Tim's reply -- the best way to implement "sealed" instances is to
use an opaque type where the "user code" simply can't see anything but a
pointer to an otherwise unknown struct.

You say "best", I'd prefer "canonical" meaning what the people do who know what they are doing. :)  But OK, that sounds indeed reasonable: I'll see what I get...
-Julio