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