On Sat, 18 Aug 2007, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > > GCC manual, section 6.1, "When
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > > is a Volatile Object Accessed?" doesn't say anything of the
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > > kind.
^^^^^
> > True, "implementation-defined" as per the C standard _is_ supposed to mean
^^^^^
> > "unspecified behaviour where each implementation documents how the choice
> > is made". So ok, probably GCC isn't "documenting" this
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > implementation-defined behaviour which it is supposed to, but can't really
> > fault them much for this, probably.
>
> GCC _is_ documenting this, namely in this section 6.1.
(Again totally petty, but) Yes, but ...
> It doesn't
^^^^^^^^^^
> mention volatile-casted stuff. Draw your own conclusions.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
... exactly. So that's why I said "GCC isn't documenting _this_".
Man, try _reading_ mails before replying to them ...
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
