Article View: comp.std.c
Article #5053Re: volatile
From: Karl Heuer
Date: Tue, 17 May 1988 19:37
Date: Tue, 17 May 1988 19:37
17 lines
1358 bytes
1358 bytes
In article <23502@pyramid.pyramid.com> cquenel@pyramid.UUCP writes: >In article <4025@haddock.ISC.COM> karl@haddock.ima.isc.com (Karl Heuer) writes: >>If |volatile| were removed, we'd either have to go back to the old rules >>(everything's volatile) or absorb its meaning into |sig_atomic_t|. > >To the best of my knowledge, "volatile" is the only way of /guaranteeing/ >that a (for instance) local variable will NOT be restored/affected by a >longjmp(). True. In addition to absorbing its meaning into |sig_atomic_t|, we'd have to add a guarantee that setjmp()/longjmp() will properly synchronize *all* objects (which some of us think should be done anyway). X3J11 vetoed this because it would setjmp() magic. I expect that a proposal to make sig_atomic_t magic would be even worse. Karl W. Z. Heuer (ima!haddock!karl or karl@haddock.isc.com), The Walking Lint
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<4053@haddock.ISC.COM>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!necntc!ima!haddock!karlReferences:
<2642@geac.UUCP> <225800029@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu> <4727@ihlpf.ATT.COM> <5367@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> <4025@haddock.ISC.COM> <23502@pyramid.pyramid.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!necntc!ima!haddock!karl From: karl@haddock.ISC.COM (Karl Heuer) Newsgroups: comp.std.c Subject: Re: volatile Message-ID: <4053@haddock.ISC.COM> Date: 17 May 88 19:37:26 GMT References: <2642@geac.UUCP> <225800029@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu> <4727@ihlpf.ATT.COM> <5367@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> <4025@haddock.ISC.COM> <23502@pyramid.pyramid.com> Reply-To: karl@haddock.ima.isc.com (Karl Heuer) Organization: Interactive Systems, Boston Lines: 17