Related articles |
---|
Re: The semicolon habit mark@omnifest.uwm.edu (1995-05-10) |
Re: The semicolon habit salomon@silver.cs.umanitoba.ca (1995-05-11) |
Re: The semicolon habit graham.matthews@maths.anu.edu.au (1995-05-15) |
Re: The semicolon habit Paul_Long@ortel.org (1995-05-17) |
Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
From: | Paul_Long@ortel.org (Paul Long) |
Keywords: | syntax, design |
Organization: | Oregon Telcom |
References: | 95-05-102 |
Date: | Wed, 17 May 1995 04:49:26 GMT |
graham.matthews@maths.anu.edu.au writes:
>salomon@silver.cs.umanitoba.ca (Daniel J. Salomon) writes:
[snip]
>> while(x < 10.0);
>>and not notice the error. There is no syntax error here, but this
statement
>>is almost certainly a run-time error.
>
>To my mind this is a *semantic* rather than syntactic flaw in C.
[snip]
[Keep in mind that if x is volatile, that's a reasonable thing to write.
It's a subtle issue. -John]
We wrote a C compiler for a client's DSP chip. The sample code they gave us
had lots of these indefinite while loops. They looped on a volatile
memory-mapped I/O location until it, for example, went non-zero. They use
this idiom to synchronize with other components in their execution
environment.
Paul Long
plong@perf.com
--
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.