It seems to me that the proper use of const
would (mostly) eliminate the need for that tip. The part that still seems useful is when reading caller code, seeing:
Func1(x);
it isn't quite clear what is being done with x
(particularly with a nondescript name like Func1
). Instead using:
Func2(&x);
with the above convention, indicates to the caller that they should expect x
to be modified.