Re: [PATCH] C undefined behavior fix

From: jtv (
Date: Mon Jan 07 2002 - 17:16:20 EST

On Mon, Jan 07, 2002 at 05:28:32PM -0500, Tim Hollebeek wrote:
> You're not allowed to be that smart wrt volatile. If the programmer
> says the value might change unpredictably and should not be optimized,
> then It Is So and the compiler must respect that even if it determines
> It Cannot Possibly Happen.

Naturally I hope you're right. But how does that follow from the Standard?
I have to admit I don't have a copy handy. :(

Let's say we have this simplified version of the problem:

        int a = 3;
                volatile int b = 10;
                a += b;

Is there really language in the Standard preventing the compiler from
constant-folding this code to "int a = 13;"?


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jan 07 2002 - 21:00:37 EST