有时候(太频繁了!)我必须理清别人的c++代码。我们都知道别人的c++代码几乎从定义上看是一团乱子:)所以我要破译本地数据流的第一件事就是在每个变量定义中放入const，直到编译器开始吠叫。这也意味着const限定值参数，因为它们只是由调用者初始化的花哨局部变量。

啊，我希望变量默认是const的，而非const的变量是可变的:)

const应该是c++的默认值。 像这样:

int i = 5 ; // i is a constant

var int i = 5 ; // i is a real variable

只要可以，我就用const。参数的Const意味着它们不应该改变它们的值。这在通过引用传递时尤其有价值。Const for function声明该函数不应更改类成员。

由于形参是按值传递的，从调用函数的角度来看，是否指定const没有任何区别。将按值传递的参数声明为const基本上没有任何意义。

If the parameter is passed by value (and is not a reference), usually there is not much difference whether the parameter is declared as const or not (unless it contains a reference member -- not a problem for built-in types). If the parameter is a reference or pointer, it is usually better to protect the referenced/pointed-to memory, not the pointer itself (I think you cannot make the reference itself const, not that it matters much as you cannot change the referee). It seems a good idea to protect everything you can as const. You can omit it without fear of making a mistake if the parameters are just PODs (including built-in types) and there is no chance of them changing further along the road (e.g. in your example the bool parameter).

I didn't know about the .h/.cpp file declaration difference, but it does make some sense. At the machine code level, nothing is "const", so if you declare a function (in the .h) as non-const, the code is the same as if you declare it as const (optimizations aside). However, it helps you to enlist the compiler that you will not change the value of the variable inside the implementation of the function (.ccp). It might come handy in the case when you're inheriting from an interface that allows change, but you don't need to change to parameter to achieve the required functionality.

原因是形参的const只在函数内局部应用，因为它处理的是数据的副本。这意味着函数签名实际上是相同的。不过，经常这样做可能是不好的风格。

我个人倾向于不使用const，除了引用和指针形参。对于复制的对象来说，这并不重要，尽管它可以更安全，因为它表明了函数中的意图。这真的是一个主观判断。我倾向于使用const_iterator，但当循环某些东西时，我不打算修改它，所以我猜每个人都有自己的，只要严格维护引用类型的const正确性。