Re: Why doesn't combine like volatiles? (volatile_ok again, sorry!)

[Mike Stump <mrs at apple dot com>]

On Nov 28, 2005, at 9:41 AM, Andrew Pinski wrote:
> Huh? they are not carefully written at all.  This is why I said what
> is GNU C?  Again the language is not written out so it means anything.

So then clearly, since it means anything, we can change gcc to accept  
pascal instead of C?  Right?  This is absurd.

> If poeple want something defined the way they like it, please write  
> some
> documentation that way and post a patch.  I could care which way it  
> goes
> except right now, we can do anything because it is not that well  
> written
> (well it is undocuemented).

I disagree.  For example, there is behavior mandated by the Standard  
for C, such as this, that, reasonably, I think we have to follow.   
You can argue that we don't have to follow the standard but I'm not  
just going to listen to you.