> In that case it specifies that any evaluation of "*foo" in an rvalue > context specifies a read (with a few exceptions for G++ where the C++ > language generally confuses things). Specifically it mentions the > statement "*src;" and discusses the statement as providing "a void > context". In other words, a statement such as "(void)(expr);" is > redundant because the statement already implies void context and the > extra cast-to-void is just extra text. As such "(void)(*src);" on a > "volatile int *src;" is documented to force a read of "*src". Now, > if you actually _use_ the result over just casting it to void and > discarding it, then GCC can provide no _less_ guarantee with regards > to the read-and-store than it provides to the read-and-discard.
I read over this section and didn't realize the implications of the void context. I now agree with you. DS - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
