C# equivalent of a const pointer/pointer to const in C++

Question

I am learning the basics of C++, coming from the .NET world (C#).

One topic i found interesting was the const keyword and its usage with pointers (const pointer/pointer to const).

I'd like to know if there's any C# language equivalent of the const pointer/pointer to const that C++ has? (I know C# doesn't have pointers, i am considering references to be the pointer-like types in C#).

Also, out of interest, if there's no such equivalent, what were the decisions behind not including such a feature?

Answer 1

There is no direct equivalent to passing references as 'const' in C#, but there are alternative ways to accomplish its purpose. The most common way to do this is to make your reference class either completely immutable (once constructed, its state should never change) or pass it as an immutable public interface. The latter is the closest to the intention of the 'const' parameter contract (I'm giving you a reference to something so you can use it, but I'm asking you not to change it.) A poorly-behaved client could 'cast away' the public interface to a mutable form, of course, but it still makes the intention clear. You could 'cast away' const in C++, as well, thought this was rarely a good idea.

---

One other thing in C++ is that you would often prefer to pass as const when you knew that the lifetime of the reference you were passing was limited in scope. C++ often follows the pattern where objects are created and destroyed on the stack within method scope, so any references to those objects should not be persisted outside that scope (since using them after they fall out of scope could cause really nasty stack corruption crashes.) A const reference should not be mutated, so it's a strong hint that storing it somewhere to reference later would be a bad idea. A method with const parameters is promising that it's safe to pass these scoped references. Since C# never allows storing references to objects on the stack (outside of parameters), this is less of a concern.

Answer 2

The concept of constant objects (i.e. readonly) in C# (or Java for that matter) corresponds approximately to object *const in C++, i.e. a constant pointer to a non-constant object.

There are several reasons for it - for one specifying const correctly and making it useful in the language is quite hard. Taking c++ as an example, you have to define lots of methods twice with only small changes to the signature, there's const_cast, the fact that const is only applied shallow, etc.

So C# went for the easy solution to make the language simpler - D went the other way with transitive const correctness, etc. as I understand it (never written a single line in D, so take that with a grain of salt).

The usual solution in C#/Java is to have immutable classes, possibly using a builder pattern, or a simple wrapper that prohibits changes (e.g. all the unmodifiable collections that wrap another collection and throw exceptions for the mutating methods like add).