Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!cmcl2!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn )
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: The world is not ready for 'volatile'
Message-ID: <9236@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Date: 27 Dec 88 06:00:16 GMT
References: <141@bms-at.UUCP> <275@twwells.uucp> <15166@mimsy.UUCP>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 10

In article <15166@mimsy.UUCP> chris@mimsy.UUCP (Chris Torek) writes:
>... ["register"] implies not-volatile and
>not-aliased; and it does so in a way that the compiler can reasonably
>enforce.

No, I reject this claim.  A STORAGE CLASS by no means obviates the
need for type qualifiers.  You could conceivably invent a language
with only type qualifiers (one of which you may choose to name
"register") and no storage classes, but it wouldn't be reasonable
to call that language "C".