Optimizing Away

[Default User]

No, not at all. We just gotta start reading the messages now.

Oops, too late for me. I missed it.




Brian

 

[Tor Rustad]

No, not at all. We just gotta start reading the messages now.

We need volatile-qualified people as well.

 

[J. J. Farrell]

We need volatile-qualified people as well.

We already have lots of volatile qualified people, though - will they
do instead?

 

[Tor Rustad]

Tor Rustad wrote:


We already have lots of volatile qualified people,
though - will they do instead?

We only have volatile-qualified objects. ;-)

 

[Sjouke Burry]

We need volatile-qualified people as well.

Nah... only volatile people, you dont need to qualify them

 

[Old Wolf]

Even if it is defined for your peculiar system, why use it? All
you are doing is creating another needless incompatibility.

The system I'm coding on at the moment, does not even
accept int main(void).

 

[Kenny McCormack]

I believe that it *might* not because I don't know one way or the
other. For the same reason, I believe that it might.

OP clearly stated that void main(void) was documented and well-defined
for his freestanding implementation, leaving little room for doubt.[/QUOTE]

Such subtleties are generally lost on KT.