May be this wont be a valid argument. but if we increment the value of a const variable inside a function compiler will give us an error: "error: increment of read-only parameter". so that means we can use const key word as a way to prevent accidentally modifying our variables inside functions(which we are not supposed to/read-only). so if we accidentally did it at the compile time compiler will let us know that. this is specially important if you are not the only one who is working on this project.

使用const时要记住的一点是，从一开始就将对象设为const要比稍后再尝试将它们放入要容易得多。

当你想要某些东西保持不变时，使用const -它是一个附加的提示，描述了你的函数做什么以及期望什么。我见过许多C API可以处理其中的一些，特别是那些接受C -string的API !

我更倾向于省略cpp文件中的const关键字，而不是头，但由于我倾向于剪切+粘贴它们，它们将同时保留在两个地方。我不知道为什么编译器允许这样做，我猜这是编译器的事情。最佳实践肯定是将const关键字放在两个文件中。

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.

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。

在你提到的情况下，它不会影响API的调用者，这就是为什么它不常做(并且在头文件中也没有必要)。它只影响函数的实现。

这并不是一件特别糟糕的事情，但考虑到它不会影响您的API，它的好处并不是那么大，而且它增加了类型，所以通常不这样做。

下面两行在功能上是等价的:

int foo (int a);
int foo (const int a);

显然，如果用第二种方式定义，就不能在foo对象体中修改a，但从外部看没有区别。

const真正有用的地方是引用或指针形参:

int foo (const BigStruct &a);
int foo (const BigStruct *a);

这就是说，foo可以接受一个大的参数，也许是一个千兆字节大小的数据结构，而不需要复制它。同时，它也告诉调用者:“Foo不会*改变参数的内容。”传递const引用还允许编译器做出某些性能决定。

*:除非它抛弃了const-ness，但那是另一篇文章。