Is it better to remove “const” in front of “primitive” types used as function parameters in the header?

Question

In the code review process, one of my coworkers mentioned to me that \"const\"s in front of \"primitive types\" used as a function parameter in a header is meaningless, and

Answer 1

Follow the recommendations given you in code review.

Using const for value arguments has no semantic value — it is only meaningful (potentially) for implementation of your function — and even in that case I would argue that it is unnecessary.

edit: Just to be clear: your function’s prototype is the public interface to your function. What const does is offer a guarantee that you will not modify references.

int a = 7;
do_something( a );

void do_something(       int& x );  // 'a' may be modified
void do_something( const int& x );  // I will not modify 'a'
void do_something(       int  x );  // no one cares what happens to x

Using const is something akin to TMI — it is unimportant anywhere except inside the function whether or not 'x' is modified.

edit2: I also very much like the information in StoryTeller’s answer