Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!cmcl2!brl-adm!umd5!cvl!elsie!ado
From: ado@elsie.UUCP (Arthur David Olson)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions,comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: lint and volatile and const constructs
Message-ID: <7479@elsie.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 22-Sep-87 10:33:13 EDT
Article-I.D.: elsie.7479
Posted: Tue Sep 22 10:33:13 1987
Date-Received: Thu, 24-Sep-87 04:43:28 EDT
References: <832@ektools.UUCP> <6457@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Organization: NIH-LEC, Bethesda, MD
Lines: 31
Summary: The right way
Xref: mnetor comp.unix.questions:4212 comp.lang.c:4484

In article <6457@brl-smoke.ARPA>, gwyn@brl-smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn ) writes:
> In article <832@ektools.UUCP> jim@ektools.UUCP (James Hugh Moore) writes:
> >The Tektronix software supports const and volatile declarations for data.
> >Well lint complains bitterly about these.
> 
> 	lint -Dconst= -Dvolatile= sources.c

Which will get the code past lint, and will leave you with code that isn't
portable to sites with existing C compilers (for example, 4.[123]BSD sites).

The better approach is a variant of one suggested by an earlier poster:
handle the const/volatile vagaries in a header file.  Suggested:

	#ifndef __STDC__
	#define const
	#define volatile
	#endif /* __STDC__ */

Note that neither the command-line approach nor the header file approach
will help if you have declarations such as

		const x = 3;

in which const (or volatile) is the only keyword in the declaration.  But from
what I've been reading X3J11 may be moving in the direction of outlawing such
declarations; they should be avoided.
--
CC is a registered trademark of the Institute for Scientific Information, Inc.
Lint is an Oscar Madison trademark.
-- 
ado@vax2.nlm.nih.gov	ADO, VAX, and NIH are trademarks of Ampex and DEC.