This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: access to a volatile variable
- To: Mike Stump <mrs at wrs dot com>
- Subject: Re: access to a volatile variable
- From: Nathan Sidwell <nathan at acm dot org>
- Date: Fri, 18 Jun 1999 18:40:39 +0100
- CC: nathan at compsci dot bristol dot ac dot uk, osv at Javad dot RU, egcs-bugs at egcs dot cygnus dot com
- Organization: University of Bristol
- References: <199906181624.JAA05363@kankakee.wrs.com>
- Reply-To: nathan at compsci dot bristol dot ac dot uk
Mike Stump wrote:
> > Sergei Organov wrote:
> > >
> > > Because, for example, *whole* struct might be single hardware register:
----------------------------*whole*-----------------single
Sorry, I'd missed this very important part of Sergei's mail, my mistake.
The discussion seemed to be going in the direction of getting rock solid
guarantees about arbitrary structs. I see that was not Sergei's intention.
> I think that is perfectly clear and correct. *vpi; means fetch. End
> of story. :-( I'll see about getting this fixed in C++, though it
> will be harder than just derailing it in a working group, as I did
> last time.
I think that would be a very sensible thing to do.
nathan
--
Dr Nathan Sidwell :: Computer Science Department :: Bristol University
I have seen the death of PhotoShop -- it is called GIMP
nathan@acm.org http://www.cs.bris.ac.uk/~nathan/ nathan@cs.bris.ac.uk