Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!teknowledge-vaxc!sri-unix!garth!smryan From: smryan@garth.UUCP (Steven Ryan) Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: volatile: a summary Message-ID: <770@garth.UUCP> Date: 21 Jun 88 19:44:28 GMT References: <11837@mimsy.UUCP> <3811@pasteur.Berkeley.Edu> <580@wsccs.UUCP> <761@garth.UUCP> <12057@mimsy.UUCP> Reply-To: smryan@garth.UUCP (Steven Ryan) Organization: INTERGRAPH (APD) -- Palo Alto, CA Lines: 11 >The real idea is that, if the compilers get it right more often than the >programmers, we (Robert Firth and I) would rather have the compilers do it. That's fine. ANSI is not a law enforcement agency. If the majority of paying customers don't want volatile, it will wither away. If they do, everybody else will have to live with it (unless their compiler has switch to ignore it). There is a lot of muck out in the real world, but calling it stupid is a personal reflection and calling it unnecessary doesn't say to whom.