CGAL users discussion list

["Max" <>]

>Hi Max,
>
>you are right, it's not so nice to have this function without a const.
>But you are wrong, it's not a bug, because the code runs as intended. As
>you already found out, it's not trivial to make everything const correct
>in SNC_io_parser. 

Yes, it's what I got from having a glance on SNC_io_parser.
Yes, correctness is more important thant elegance, in case we cannot get 
both. :-) 

>Actually, it would be best if I split the class
>SNC_io_parser into two classes---one for input and one for output. But I
>regard this as a quite unimportant item on my long list of stuff I'd
>like to improve in Nef_3. 

That's nice. 

B/Rgds
Max

>
>Peter
>
>On Mon, 2008-02-11 at 13:47 +0800, Max wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I found the code in Nef_polyhedron_iostream_3.h:
>> 
>> template <typename Kernel, typename Items, typename Mark>
>> std::ostream& operator<<
>>  (std::ostream& os, Nef_polyhedron_3<Kernel,Items,Mark>& NP)
>> {
>> 
>> Should the line
>>  (std::ostream& os, Nef_polyhedron_3<Kernel,Items,Mark>& NP)
>> be 
>>  (std::ostream& os, const Nef_polyhedron_3<Kernel,Items,Mark>& NP)
>>                    ^^^^^^^
>> ?
>> 
>> If that's true, its forward declaration and friend declaration in class
>> Nef_polyhedron_3 should be corrected as const, and SNC_io_parser.h stuff.
>> 
>> I attemped to 'correct'(if I'm correct :-)) the files 
>> Nef_polyhedron_iostream_3.h
>> and Nef_polyhedron_3.h, but that seems to be not simple in file 
>> SNC_io_parser.h.
>> So I've rolled back my change.
>> 
>> Thanks.
>> Max
>-- 
>You are currently subscribed to cgal-discuss.
>To unsubscribe or access the archives, go to
>https://lists-sop.inria.fr/wws/info/cgal-discuss
>