只要可以，我就用const。参数的Const意味着它们不应该改变它们的值。这在通过引用传递时尤其有价值。Const for function声明该函数不应更改类成员。

你的例子中所有的const都没有目的。c++默认情况下是值传递的，因此该函数获得这些整型和布尔型的副本。即使函数修改了它们，调用者的副本也不会受到影响。

所以我会避免额外的const，因为

他们redudant 他们弄得乱七八糟 文本 他们阻止我 更改传入的值 它可能有用或有效的情况。

May be this wont be a valid argument. but if we increment the value of a const variable inside a function compiler will give us an error: "error: increment of read-only parameter". so that means we can use const key word as a way to prevent accidentally modifying our variables inside functions(which we are not supposed to/read-only). so if we accidentally did it at the compile time compiler will let us know that. this is specially important if you are not the only one who is working on this project.

const应该是c++的默认值。 像这样:

int i = 5 ; // i is a constant

var int i = 5 ; // i is a real variable

我说const你的值形参。

考虑这个bug函数:

bool isZero(int number)
{
  if (number = 0)  // whoops, should be number == 0
    return true;
  else
    return false;
}

如果number形参是const，编译器将停止并警告我们这个错误。

If the parameter is passed by value (and is not a reference), usually there is not much difference whether the parameter is declared as const or not (unless it contains a reference member -- not a problem for built-in types). If the parameter is a reference or pointer, it is usually better to protect the referenced/pointed-to memory, not the pointer itself (I think you cannot make the reference itself const, not that it matters much as you cannot change the referee). It seems a good idea to protect everything you can as const. You can omit it without fear of making a mistake if the parameters are just PODs (including built-in types) and there is no chance of them changing further along the road (e.g. in your example the bool parameter).

I didn't know about the .h/.cpp file declaration difference, but it does make some sense. At the machine code level, nothing is "const", so if you declare a function (in the .h) as non-const, the code is the same as if you declare it as const (optimizations aside). However, it helps you to enlist the compiler that you will not change the value of the variable inside the implementation of the function (.ccp). It might come handy in the case when you're inheriting from an interface that allows change, but you don't need to change to parameter to achieve the required functionality.