D
Dave
Hello all,
I've been wondering... Why is it that a reference may be bound only to a
const object? If a reference were bound to a non-const object and that
object were modified, what harm could result? A temporary is just as real
of an object as any other. It lacks a name, but that doesn't make it less
real. Class (no pun intended) warfare seems to be alive and well!
Thanks,
Dave
I've been wondering... Why is it that a reference may be bound only to a
const object? If a reference were bound to a non-const object and that
object were modified, what harm could result? A temporary is just as real
of an object as any other. It lacks a name, but that doesn't make it less
real. Class (no pun intended) warfare seems to be alive and well!
Thanks,
Dave