|GNU C keyword volatile, GNU compiler/optimizer and instruction re-or Arun@Winphoria.Com (Arun) (2002-09-19)|
|Re: GNU C keyword volatile, GNU compiler/optimizer and instruction firstname.lastname@example.org (Nick Maclaren) (2002-09-20)|
|Re: GNU C keyword volatile, GNU compiler/optimizer and instruction re- email@example.com (Mike Stump) (2002-09-29)|
|Re: GNU C keyword volatile, GNU compiler/optimizer and instruction re- firstname.lastname@example.org.OZ.AU (Fergus Henderson) (2002-10-13)|
|Re: GNU C keyword volatile, GNU compiler/optimizer and instruction re- email@example.com (2002-10-18)|
|From:||"Fergus Henderson" <firstname.lastname@example.org.OZ.AU>|
|Date:||13 Oct 2002 15:53:04 -0400|
|Organization:||Computer Science, University of Melbourne|
|References:||02-09-118 02-09-122 02-09-170|
|Posted-Date:||13 Oct 2002 15:53:03 EDT|
Our moderator wrote:
>[I find that the main use of volatile is as a portable way to write
>fundamentally unportable code like device drivers. -John]
Although device drivers are obviously specific to particular hardware,
there's no fundamental reason why device drivers shouldn't be portable
between different C compilers. Indeed, it's even possible for the
same device driver to work on different operating systems, provided
that they support the same device driver interface. See, for example,
the UDI (Uniform Driver Interface) Project
Fergus Henderson <email@example.com> | "I have always known that the pursuit
The University of Melbourne | of excellence is a lethal habit"
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh> | -- the last words of T. S. Garp.
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.