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.