You can't - at least not in the same way you do in C++. C# (actually, the CLI) has no real concept of const correctness, For example, there's no way to specify that a method should not modify an argument passed in to it. And there's no way to specify that a method does not modify the object on which it is acting. C++ constructs objects from base to derived, so when the base constructor is executing the object is effectively a base object, and virtual method calls are routed to the base class implementation. By contrast, in .NET the derived constructor is executed first, which means the object is always a derived object and virtual method calls are always routed to the derived implementation. (Note that the C# compiler inserts a call to the base class constructor at the start of the derived constructor, thus preserving standard OO semantics by creating the illusion that the base constructor is executed first.)

The same issue arises when calling virtual methods from C# destructors. A virtual method call in a base destructor will be routed to the derived implementation.
Source:
http :// andymcm.com/csharpfaq.htm#3.9

Answered by Raksha , an ibibo Master, at 9:09 AM on June 27, 2008

hell radhe well,For example, there's no way to specify that a method should not modify an argument passed in to it. And there's no way to specify that a method does not modify the object on which it is acting. To get a feel for the angst this causes among some C++ programmers, read the feedback on this post from Raymond Chen. There are of course ways of addressing this issue.

You can't - at least not in the same way you do in C++. C# (actually, the CLI) has no real concept of const correctness, For example, there's no way to specify that a method should not modify an argument passed in to it. And there's no way to specify that a method does not modify the object on which it is acting. C++ constructs objects from base to derived, so when the base constructor is executing the object is effectively a base object, and virtual method calls are routed to the base class implementation. By contrast, in .NET the derived constructor is executed first, which means the object is always a derived object and virtual method calls are always routed to the derived implementation. (Note that the C# compiler inserts a call to the base class constructor at the start of the derived constructor, thus preserving standard OO semantics by creating the illusion that the base constructor is executed first.)

The same issue arises when calling virtual methods from C# destructors. A virtual method call in a base destructor will be routed to the derived implementation.
Source:
http :// andymcm.com/csharpfaq.htm#3.9

Answered by raj u , an ibibo Master, at 1:05 PM on June 04, 2008

You can't - at least not in the same way you do in C++. C# (actually, the CLI) has no real concept of const correctness, For example, there's no way to specify that a method should not modify an argument passed in to it. And there's no way to specify that a method does not modify the object on which it is acting. C++ constructs objects from base to derived, so when the base constructor is executing the object is effectively a base object, and virtual method calls are routed to the base class implementation. By contrast, in .NET the derived constructor is executed first, which means the object is always a derived object and virtual method calls are always routed to the derived implementation. (Note that the C# compiler inserts a call to the base class constructor at the start of the derived constructor, thus preserving standard OO semantics by creating the illusion that the base constructor is executed first.)

The same issue arises when calling virtual methods from C# destructors. A virtual method call in a base destructor will be routed to the derived implementation.
Source:
http :// andymcm.com/csharpfaq.htm#3.9

Answered by Romi , an ibibo Master, at 6:26 PM on June 03, 2008

Hi,

You can't - at least not in the same way you do in C++. C# (actually, the CLI) has no real concept of const correctness, For example, there's no way to specify that a method should not modify an argument passed in to it.

And there's no way to specify that a method does not modify the object on which it is acting.

To get a feel for the angst this causes among some C++ programmers, read the feedback on this post from Raymond Chen.

There are of course ways of addressing this issue.

For example, see Brad Abram's post (and associated feedback) for some ideas on adding optional read-only behaviour to collection classes.

Answered by Ajay Pal , an ibibo Master, at 2:50 PM on June 02, 2008

well,For example, there's no way to specify that a method should not modify an argument passed in to it. And there's no way to specify that a method does not modify the object on which it is acting. To get a feel for the angst this causes among some C++ programmers, read the feedback on this post from Raymond Chen. There are of course ways of addressing this issue.

You can't - at least not in the same way you do in C++. C# (actually, the CLI) has no real concept of const correctness, For example, there's no way to specify that a method should not modify an argument passed in to it. And there's no way to specify that a method does not modify the object on which it is acting. C++ constructs objects from base to derived, so when the base constructor is executing the object is effectively a base object, and virtual method calls are routed to the base class implementation. By contrast, in .NET the derived constructor is executed first, which means the object is always a derived object and virtual method calls are always routed to the derived implementation. (Note that the C# compiler inserts a call to the base class constructor at the start of the derived constructor, thus preserving standard OO semantics by creating the illusion that the base constructor is executed first.)

The same issue arises when calling virtual methods from C# destructors. A virtual method call in a base destructor will be routed to the derived implementation.
Source:
http :// andymcm.com/csharpfaq.htm#3.9

Answered by Saurabh , an ibibo Master, at 8:53 AM on June 02, 2008

You can't - at least not in the same way you do in C++. C# (actually, the CLI) has no real concept of const correctness, For example, there's no way to specify that a method should not modify an argument passed in to it. And there's no way to specify that a method does not modify the object on which it is acting. C++ constructs objects from base to derived, so when the base constructor is executing the object is effectively a base object, and virtual method calls are routed to the base class implementation. By contrast, in .NET the derived constructor is executed first, which means the object is always a derived object and virtual method calls are always routed to the derived implementation. (Note that the C# compiler inserts a call to the base class constructor at the start of the derived constructor, thus preserving standard OO semantics by creating the illusion that the base constructor is executed first.)

The same issue arises when calling virtual methods from C# destructors. A virtual method call in a base destructor will be routed to the derived implementation.
Source:
http :// andymcm.com/csharpfaq.htm#3.9

Answered by Ram Singh , an ibibo Master, at 6:57 AM on June 02, 2008

You can't - at least not in the same way you do in C++. C# (actually, the CLI) has no real concept of const correctness, For example, there's no way to specify that a method should not modify an argument passed in to it. And there's no way to specify that a method does not modify the object on which it is acting. C++ constructs objects from base to derived, so when the base constructor is executing the object is effectively a base object, and virtual method calls are routed to the base class implementation. By contrast, in .NET the derived constructor is executed first, which means the object is always a derived object and virtual method calls are always routed to the derived implementation. (Note that the C# compiler inserts a call to the base class constructor at the start of the derived constructor, thus preserving standard OO semantics by creating the illusion that the base constructor is executed first.)

The same issue arises when calling virtual methods from C# destructors. A virtual method call in a base destructor will be routed to the derived implementation.
Source:
http :// andymcm.com/csharpfaq.htm#3.9

Answered by Anju Singh , an ibibo Master, at 6:09 AM on June 02, 2008

well Radhe, You can't - at least not in the same way you do in C++. C# (actually, the CLI) has no real concept of const correctness, For example, there's no way to specify that a method should not modify an argument passed in to it. And there's no way to specify that a method does not modify the object on which it is acting. C++ constructs objects from base to derived, so when the base constructor is executing the object is effectively a base object, and virtual method calls are routed to the base class implementation. By contrast, in .NET the derived constructor is executed first, which means the object is always a derived object and virtual method calls are always routed to the derived implementation. (Note that the C# compiler inserts a call to the base class constructor at the start of the derived constructor, thus preserving standard OO semantics by creating the illusion that the base constructor is executed first.)

The same issue arises when calling virtual methods from C# destructors. A virtual method call in a base destructor will be routed to the derived implementation.

Source:
ht tp:// andymcm.com/csharpfaq.htm#3.9

Answered by satyaiitk , an ibibo Master, at 7:35 PM on June 01, 2008

How do I enforce const correctness in C#?
Andy Mc's C# FAQ for C++ programmers
You can't - at least not in the same way you do in C++. C# (actually, the CLI) has no real concept of const correctness, For example, there's no way to specify that a method should not modify an argument passed in to it. And there's no way to specify that a method does not modify the object on which it is acting. To get a feel for the angst this causes among some C++ programmers, read the feedback on this post from Raymond Chen. There are of course ways of addressing this issue.

Answered by Mohd Farooq , an ibibo Master, at 7:07 AM on May 31, 2008

You can't - at least not in the same way you do in C++. C# (actually, the CLI) has no real concept of const correctness, For example, there's no way to specify that a method should not modify an argument passed in to it. And there's no way to specify that a method does not modify the object on which it is acting. To get a feel for the angst this causes among some C++ programmers, read the feedback on this post from Raymond Chen. There are of course ways of addressing this issue.

Answered by MAXI , an ibibo Specialist, at 5:54 AM on May 31, 2008