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。

Const形参仅在通过引用(即引用或指针)传递形参时才有用。当编译器看到一个const形参时，它会确保形参中使用的变量在函数体中没有被修改。为什么会有人想让一个按值参数作为常数呢?: -)

我说const你的值形参。

考虑这个bug函数:

bool isZero(int number)
{
  if (number = 0)  // whoops, should be number == 0
    return true;
  else
    return false;
}

如果number形参是const，编译器将停止并警告我们这个错误。

总结:

通常情况下，const的值传递是无用的，最多是误导。从GOTW006 但是您可以像处理变量一样在.cpp中添加它们。 注意，标准库不使用const。例如std::vector::at(size_type pos)。对标准库来说足够好的东西对我来说也是好的。

关于编译器优化:http://www.gotw.ca/gotw/081.htm