The world is not ready for 'volatile'

[Chris Torek]

>In article <15166 at mimsy.UUCP> I suggested that
>>... ["register"] implies not-volatile and not-aliased; and it does so
>>in a way that the compiler can reasonably enforce.

In article <9236 at smoke.BRL.MIL> gwyn at smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn) writes:
>No, I reject this claim.

You mean to say that a register could be aliased?  Not in C!  How
about a volatile register?  It is a possibility, but it seems entirely
unnecessary.

>A STORAGE CLASS by no means obviates the need for type qualifiers.

I did not say that.  I said `register implies not-volatile, not-
aliased': that `volatile register' and `aliased register' are
nonsensical combinations.
-- 
In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci Dept (+1 301 454 7163)
Domain:	chris at mimsy.umd.edu	Path:	uunet!mimsy!chris