Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!cmcl2!nrl-cmf!ames!amdahl!rtech!llama!jas
From: jas@llama.rtech.UUCP (Jim Shankland)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Volatile is Necessary
Message-ID: <1884@rtech.UUCP>
Date: 29 Mar 88 01:36:55 GMT
References: <12578@brl-adm.ARPA> <1988Mar25.172355.348@utzoo.uucp> <8107@sol.ARPA> <7569@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Sender: news@rtech.UUCP
Reply-To: jas@llama.UUCP (Jim Shankland)
Organization: Eddie Enterprises
Lines: 18

In article <7569@brl-smoke.ARPA> gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>) writes:
> [About "volatile" being necessary for concurrent processes using
> shared memory:]
>You need a hell of a lot more than "volatile" to properly
>synchronize concurrent processes.

True enough, but not relevant.  Assuming you *have* the "hell of a lot
more" -- System V semaphores, for example -- you still need "volatilie."
Therefore, "volatile" is hardly an esoteric frill.
Jim Shankland
  ..!ihnp4!cpsc6a!\
               sun!rtech!jas
 ..!ucbvax!mtxinu!/

  > The preceding message was brought to you courtesy of Eddie       <
  > Enterprises, a broadly diversified, multinational corporation    <
  > bringing software, roofing supplies, exquisite keyboard sounds,  <
  > and other fine products to a hungry world.                       <