const int *p vs. int const *p - Is const after the type acceptable?

I hope this explanation from B. Stroustrup's FAQ on Style & Techniques will give you a definite answer.

Bjarne Stroustrup's C++ Style and Technique FAQ

---

I personaly prefer:

int const* pi;
int* const pi;

Because const identifies the left token which is intended to be const.

And you definitely keep the same consistency when using smth like that:

int const* const pi;

Instead of writing inconsistently:

const int* const pi;

And what happens if you have a pointer to pointer and so on:

int const* const* const pi;

Instead of:

const int* const* const pi;

The most important thing is consistency. If there aren't any coding guidelines for this, then pick one and stick with it. But, if your team already has a de facto standard, don't change it!

That said, I think by far the more common is

const int * i;
int * const j;

because most people write

const int n;

instead of

int const n;

A side note -- an easy way to read pointer constness is to read the declaration starting at the right.

const int * i; // pointer to an int that is const
int * const j; // constant pointer to a (non-const) int
int const * aLessPopularWay; // pointer to a const int

There's a class of examples where putting the const on the right of the type also helps avoid confusion.

If you have a pointer type in a typedef, then it is not possible to change the constness of the to type:

typedef int * PINT;
const PINT pi;

pi still has the type int * const, and this is the same no matter where you write the const.