# Const pointer semantics

**URL:** <https://ziggit.dev/t/const-pointer-semantics/17178>\
**Category:** Brainstorming\
**Created:** [August 10, 2026, 10:34pm UTC](https://ziggit.dev/t/const-pointer-semantics/17178 "2026-08-10T22:34:34Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 7

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Sze](https://ziggit.dev/user_avatar/ziggit.dev/sze/32/496_2.png) [@Sze](https://ziggit.dev/u/Sze)\
**Post date:** [August 11, 2026, 7:15pm UTC](https://ziggit.dev/t/const-pointer-semantics/17178/7 "2026-08-11T19:15:14Z")

</div>

> [@Is it possible to apply const on return result adaptively?](https://ziggit.dev/t/is-it-possible-to-apply-const-on-return-result-adaptively/3008/9):
>
> Edited - see post 9 for clarification: [Is it possible to apply const on return result adaptively? - #11 by AndrewCodeDev](https://ziggit.dev/t/is-it-possible-to-apply-const-on-return-result-adaptively/3008/11) Using @This() directly leads to conflicts regarding the member function deduction, but this can be bypassed by using anytype. The rest of the critique and observations are valid, but it is not impossible to achieve what OP was looking for. The problem you’re running into is the specification of the @This() argument because it doesn’t split hairs - it’s either const or not …

---

_[View the full topic](https://ziggit.dev/t/const-pointer-semantics/17178)._