Re: Volatile qualification on pointer and data

[David Brown <david at westcontrol dot com>]

On 26/09/2011 02:37, Miles Bader wrote:
> David Brown<david.brown@hesbynett.no>  writes:
> > So what advantages would there be in declaring a volatile buffer like
> > this to be "const"?  At best, you are helping the compiler check that
> > you don't accidentally write to it in your own code.
>
> That's actually pretty handy tho...

Oh, I'm all in favour of static error checking - use const pointers 
where possible, and there are not many of gcc's warning flags that I 
don't use.  But I'd weigh code clarity above error checking in this 
case, especially since it is very unlikely that you'd write code that 
accidentally wrote to the buffer.