\"const int\" vs. \"int const\": When Does the Distinction Matter in C ?

Deciphering the Distinction between "const int = int const?"

In the realm of programming, syntax plays a pivotal role in defining the intent and behavior of code. Among the many syntax nuances, the distinction between "const int" and "int const" has perplexed many. Let's delve into this topic to clarify the intricacies.

Are "const int" and "int const" Valid Code?

Yes, both "const int x =" and "int const x =" are valid code declarations. They define a constant integer variable named "x."

Equivalence of "const int" and "int const"?

When it comes to declaring a constant integer variable, "const int" and "int const" are interchangeable and semantically equivalent. Both syntaxes convey the same message to the compiler.

Exceptions for Pointer Types

However, the equivalence between these declarations breaks down when dealing with pointer types. Consider the following examples:

• "const int p" vs. "int const p": This syntax defines a pointer variable "p" that points to a constant integer. Both declarations accomplish this goal and are equivalent.
• "int const p" vs. "const int const p": Here, the situation is different. "int const p" declares a constant pointer variable "p" that cannot be assigned to a new memory address. On the other hand, "const int const p" declares a constant pointer variable "p" that points to a constant integer. These two declarations are not equivalent and serve distinct purposes.

The above is the detailed content of \"const int\" vs. \"int const\": When Does the Distinction Matter in C ?. For more information, please follow other related articles on the PHP Chinese website!