Remove unneeded read_only check for Array const operator
#103999
+6
−20
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Ivorforce
approved these changes
Mar 11, 2025
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is a great idea!
I had to think for a short bit if there are any risks — but I can't really think of any caveats.
There are Variant types that ignore const (e.g. Ref<Object> which even as const allows accessing the underlying Object in a mutable manner), but this PR doesn't really change anything about that. The important part is the Variant contents themselves are kept intact — which should be the case here.
Note: This addresses part of #93702
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
After checking related PRs, I believe these checks are redundant. The
read_onlycheck inConstIteratorcomes from #86518, intended to be consistent with the subscript operator, which was added in #61127 (read-onlyArray), based on #61087 (read-onlyDictionary). However,const Variant &Dictionary::operator[]does not have aread_onlycheck (not added in #61087 or subsequent PRs).Even if these checks are removed, the compiler will still prevent any modifications to container elements through these interfaces, so I think this change is safe.