- You have many
Get...
functions, none of which areconst
. All getter functions should be madeconst
member functions.You have many
Get...
functions, none of which areconst
. All getter functions should be madeconst
member functions.The idea behind
const
objects andconst
member function is too long to be included here as an answer. More can be found at Wikipedia and other resources on the web. Briefly, when an object is declaredconst
, it is meant to be read-only. When a member function is declaredconst
, in that function, the object on which the function is called is meant to be read-only.
The idea behind const
objects and const
member function is too long to be included here as an answer. More can be found at Wikipedia and other resources on the web. Briefly, when an object is declared const
, it is meant to be read-only. When a member function is declared const
, in that function, the object on which the function is called is meant to be read-only.
CodeAppender
has manyvirtual
functions even though it doesn't derive from any base class and it is not a base class of any other classes. I would remove thevirtual
specifier from those functions unless there is a need for it.CodeAppender
has manyvirtual
functions even though it doesn't derive from any base class and it is not a base class of any other classes. I would remove thevirtual
specifier from those functions unless there is a need for it.
- You have many
Get...
functions, none of which areconst
. All getter functions should be madeconst
member functions.
The idea behind const
objects and const
member function is too long to be included here as an answer. More can be found at Wikipedia and other resources on the web. Briefly, when an object is declared const
, it is meant to be read-only. When a member function is declared const
, in that function, the object on which the function is called is meant to be read-only.
CodeAppender
has manyvirtual
functions even though it doesn't derive from any base class and it is not a base class of any other classes. I would remove thevirtual
specifier from those functions unless there is a need for it.
You have many
Get...
functions, none of which areconst
. All getter functions should be madeconst
member functions.The idea behind
const
objects andconst
member function is too long to be included here as an answer. More can be found at Wikipedia and other resources on the web. Briefly, when an object is declaredconst
, it is meant to be read-only. When a member function is declaredconst
, in that function, the object on which the function is called is meant to be read-only.CodeAppender
has manyvirtual
functions even though it doesn't derive from any base class and it is not a base class of any other classes. I would remove thevirtual
specifier from those functions unless there is a need for it.
You have many
You have manyGet...
functions, none of which areconst
. All getter functions should be madeconst
member functions.Get...
functions, none of which areconst
. All getter functions should be madeconst
member functions.
The idea behind const
objects and const
member function is too long to be included here as an answer. More can be found at Wikipedia and other resources on the web. Briefly, when an object is declared const
, it is meant to be read-only. When a member function is declared const
, in that function, the object on which the function is called is meant to be read-only.
CodeAppender
has manyvirtual
functions even though it doesn't derive from any base class and it is not a base class of any other classes. I would remove thevirtual
specifier from those functions unless there is a need for it.CodeAppender
has manyvirtual
functions even though it doesn't derive from any base class and it is not a base class of any other classes. I would remove thevirtual
specifier from those functions unless there is a need for it.
You have many
Get...
functions, none of which areconst
. All getter functions should be madeconst
member functions.CodeAppender
has manyvirtual
functions even though it doesn't derive from any base class and it is not a base class of any other classes. I would remove thevirtual
specifier from those functions unless there is a need for it.
- You have many
Get...
functions, none of which areconst
. All getter functions should be madeconst
member functions.
The idea behind const
objects and const
member function is too long to be included here as an answer. More can be found at Wikipedia and other resources on the web. Briefly, when an object is declared const
, it is meant to be read-only. When a member function is declared const
, in that function, the object on which the function is called is meant to be read-only.
CodeAppender
has manyvirtual
functions even though it doesn't derive from any base class and it is not a base class of any other classes. I would remove thevirtual
specifier from those functions unless there is a need for it.
You have many
Get...
functions, none of which areconst
. All getter functions should be madeconst
member functions.CodeAppender
has manyvirtual
functions even though it doesn't derive from any base class and it is not a base class of any other classes. I would remove thevirtual
specifier from those functions unless there is a need for it.