Understanding const pointers to const value in C++ - c++

Question

I have two questions.
First of all I have a little problem with the understanding of const pointers to const values. I don't get why B::insert works, while C::insert results in a compiler error. I mean doesn't the list in C exactly equals the parameter of C::insert?
My second question is whether A const * const a, could also be written as const A& a.
class A
{
//Do stuff
};
class B
{
private:
list<A const *> l;
public:
void insert(A const * const a)
{
l.push_back(a);
}
};
class C
{
private:
list<A const * const> l;
public:
void insert(A const * const a)
{
l.push_back(a);
}
};
Edit (Compile error):
g++ -Wall -c -O2 "sonnensystem.cpp" -std=c++11 (im Verzeichnis: C:\Users\Kenan\Desktop\OPR\cppcode\Konzepte\Kapselung\Architektur\sonnensystem01)
In file included from C:/TDM-GCC-64/lib/gcc/x86_64-w64-mingw32/5.1.0/include/c++/x86_64-w64-mingw32/bits/c++allocator.h:33:0,
from C:/TDM-GCC-64/lib/gcc/x86_64-w64-mingw32/5.1.0/include/c++/bits/allocator.h:46,
from C:/TDM-GCC-64/lib/gcc/x86_64-w64-mingw32/5.1.0/include/c++/string:41,
from C:/TDM-GCC-64/lib/gcc/x86_64-w64-mingw32/5.1.0/include/c++/bits/locale_classes.h:40,
from C:/TDM-GCC-64/lib/gcc/x86_64-w64-mingw32/5.1.0/include/c++/bits/ios_base.h:41,
from C:/TDM-GCC-64/lib/gcc/x86_64-w64-mingw32/5.1.0/include/c++/ios:42,
from C:/TDM-GCC-64/lib/gcc/x86_64-w64-mingw32/5.1.0/include/c++/ostream:38,
from C:/TDM-GCC-64/lib/gcc/x86_64-w64-mingw32/5.1.0/include/c++/iostream:39,
from sonnensystem.cpp:1:
C:/TDM-GCC-64/lib/gcc/x86_64-w64-mingw32/5.1.0/include/c++/ext/new_allocator.h: In instantiation of 'struct __gnu_cxx::new_allocator<const A* const>':
C:/TDM-GCC-64/lib/gcc/x86_64-w64-mingw32/5.1.0/include/c++/bits/allocator.h:92:11: required from 'class std::allocator<const A* const>'
C:/TDM-GCC-64/lib/gcc/x86_64-w64-mingw32/5.1.0/include/c++/bits/stl_list.h:315:9: required from 'class std::__cxx11::_List_base<const A* const, std::allocator<const A* const> >'
C:/TDM-GCC-64/lib/gcc/x86_64-w64-mingw32/5.1.0/include/c++/bits/stl_list.h:507:11: required from 'class std::__cxx11::list<const A* const>'
sonnensystem.cpp:28:27: required from here
C:/TDM-GCC-64/lib/gcc/x86_64-w64-mingw32/5.1.0/include/c++/ext/new_allocator.h:93:7: error: 'const _Tp* __gnu_cxx::new_allocator<_Tp>::address(__gnu_cxx::new_allocator<_Tp>::const_reference) const [with _Tp = const A* const; __gnu_cxx::new_allocator<_Tp>::const_pointer = const A* const*; __gnu_cxx::new_allocator<_Tp>::const_reference = const A* const&]' cannot be overloaded
address(const_reference __x) const _GLIBCXX_NOEXCEPT
^
C:/TDM-GCC-64/lib/gcc/x86_64-w64-mingw32/5.1.0/include/c++/ext/new_allocator.h:89:7: error: with '_Tp* __gnu_cxx::new_allocator<_Tp>::address(__gnu_cxx::new_allocator<_Tp>::reference) const [with _Tp = const A* const; __gnu_cxx::new_allocator<_Tp>::pointer = const A* const*; __gnu_cxx::new_allocator<_Tp>::reference = const A* const&]'
address(reference __x) const _GLIBCXX_NOEXCEPT
^
Kompilierung fehlgeschlagen.

Answer 1

In your declaration A const * const, the first const says that the A * pointer points to a value that can't be changed (a const pointer). The second const says that the value of that pointer can't be changed, just like a const int can't be changed. Since list (and other standard containers) require their members to be assignable, they can't be const values.
For your second question, a A const * const and const A& are similar, but not interchangeable, as the ways you use them are different.

Answer 2

When using std::list<T>, one of the requirements for T is that it is CopyAssignable. See http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/container/list.
When you use a const type as the parameter, that requirement is not met. You will see a similar error, if not the same error, if you use:
std::list<const int> a;
a.push_back(10);
Anyway,
list<A const * const> l;
is not usable.

Answer 3

The only real difference between A const * const and A const & is that it is easier to check that the pointer is invalid (you could cast a nul pointer to A and then dereference to get a null A reference, it's just easier to go if(!a)).
The C::insert case is due to the code trying to assign to the internal node value. It would probably work if you used emplace_back instead of push_back.