Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!rutgers!mailrus!ames!haven!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn )
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: *devaddr = 0 and volatile
Message-ID: <9059@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Date: 4 Dec 88 06:07:50 GMT
References: <674@quintus.UUCP> <117@halcdc.UUCP> <468@auspex.UUCP> <13784@oberon.USC.EDU> <14832@mimsy.UUCP>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) )
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 8

In article <14832@mimsy.UUCP> chris@mimsy.UUCP (Chris Torek) writes:
>I would suggest that the compiler complain about volatile references
>that it cannot compile `properly'.

Sounds like a reasonable suggestion to me.
After all, if the programmer specified "volatile" it is safe to
assume that he had a reason for doing so, and if it can't be honored
then something is probably going to break.