Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!mtunx!whuts!homxb!hropus!ki4pv!tanner
From: tanner@ki4pv.uucp (Dr. T. Andrews)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: A different view of volatile
Message-ID: <7087@ki4pv.uucp>
Date: 7 May 88 00:53:53 GMT
References: <178@wyse.wyse.com> <4651@ihlpf.ATT.COM>
Organization: CompuData, DeLand
Lines: 8
Posted: Fri May  6 20:53:53 1988

In article <4651@ihlpf.ATT.COM>, nevin1@ihlpf.ATT.COM (he of the longish and often-seen .signature filled with bad cursive) writes:
) ... (ie, structs should not be allowed to be declared volatile), ...

Gee, thanks.  That de-values my new whiz-bang disk controller (the
one with the nice structure filled with device registers and ending
with a memory-mapped i/o buffer).
-- 
{allegra clyde!codas decvax!ucf-cs ihnp4!codas killer}!ki4pv!tanner