There are many questions discussing the details of C and C++ dealing with pointer-to-const deletion, namely that free() does not accept them and that delete and delete[] do and that constness doesn't prevent object destruction.

What I am interested on is whether you think it is a good practice to do so, not what the languages (C and C++) allow.

Arguments for pointer-to-const deletion include:

  • Linus Torvalds' kfree(), unlike C's free(), takes a void const* argument because he thinks that freeing the memory does not affect what is pointed to.
  • free() was designed before the introduction of the const keyword.
  • C++'s delete operators allow deletion of const data.

Arguments against it include:

  • Programmers do not expect data to be modified (or deleted) when they pass a pointer-to-const to it.
  • Many think that pointer-to-const implies not getting ownership of the data (but not that non-const would imply getting ownership).
  • This is the common practice seen in most libraries and existing code.

Please argument well in your responses and possibly refer to authorities. My intention is not to start a poll here.

c++ c memory-management const-correctness
Edit
Report