Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!timbuk!cs.umn.edu!uc!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!purdue!decwrl!bacchus.pa.dec.com!decvax.dec.com!decvax!evans
From: evans@decvaxdec.com (Marc Evans Ultrix Q/A)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.ultrix
Subject: Re: Use of 'volatile' on RISC ULTRIX C compiler
Message-ID: <397@decvax.decvax.dec.com.UUCP>
Date: 11 Oct 90 12:46:58 GMT
References: <11190@sybase.sybase.com>
Sender: news@decvax.dec.com.UUCP
Reply-To: evans@decvax.DEC.COM
Organization: Synergytics
Lines: 25

In article <11190@sybase.sybase.com>, mcfong@mercury.sybase.com (Martin C. Fong) writes:
|> How does the 'volatile' keyword affect the declarations below:
|> 
|> 	volatile int * a;
|> 	int volatile * b;
|> 	int * volatile c;
|> 
|> All three statements are legal under the RISC ULTRIX C compiler.
|> 
|> Most of the documentation I have (including DEC's) does not elaborate
|> enough (for me anyway) on how the 'volatile' declaration should be
|> used.

Prior to version 2.1 of the MIPS C compiler, use of the volatile keyword will
almost always produce a bad program. You should not use it...

As far as its intended definition though, it is suppose to comply with the
ANSI definition.

- Marc
-- 
===========================================================================
Marc Evans - WB1GRH - evans@decvax.DEC.COM  | Synergytics     (603)635-8876
      Unix and X Software Contractor        | 21 Hinds Ln, Pelham, NH 03076
===========================================================================