Improve const-correctness
I think it is good. Do you have an idea for list up the points of replace?
I'm sorry - I do not really understand your reply on this issue.
I have pointed already to a few places in the source files which might need further clarification about the handling of more data structures in a read-only way.
I'm grateful for your suggestion, but I guess your meaning isn't correct only the "Example" points.
Do you have any idea for find *all of the place* that need to add const?
I do not know the source files good enough to definitely say in all places where data structures are used that do not need to be modified by a passed pointer. I have got the impression that there are still more update candidates in the source code.
I hope to get a clarification on the interface design from the core software developers.
Disputed points and side-effect are too many, and team members doesn't have enough time to fix this issue.
How can the concerns about potential side effects be clarified?
Tera Term
Would you like to apply the advices from a well-known article to more places in your sources?
I suggest to add the key word "const" to the type specifiers for parameters like the following.