On Fri, 2008-01-18 at 11:14 -0800, Vadim Lobanov wrote: [cut] > Second, even if const did have stronger semantics that forbade the value of x > from being modified during execution of foo, the compiler still could not > reorder the two function calls, before it cannot assume that the two > functions (in their internal implementations) do not touch some other, > unknown to this code, global variable.
This is why GCC has the pure and const function attributes. These attributes are more powerful than the "const" keyword, and do allow optimizations with assumptions about global state. -- Zan Lynx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
