From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
From: "Douglas A. Gwyn" <DAGwyn@null.net>
Message-ID: <3DD1DDD5.8090304@null.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <01974d0bd36314a7c8172b6eca15effe@plan9.bell-labs.com>
Subject: Re: [9fans] how to avoid a memset() optimization
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 10:15:43 +0000
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 1ca7497e-eacb-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

Russ Cox wrote:
> I disagree.  It hurts readability and clarity, all
> to avoid a bug in gcc.  If I asked it to zero the
> memory, then, damn it!, zero the memory.

It's not a bug, it's an allowed optimization (in the
absence of volatile qualification).  The question is
where to draw the line for degree of optimization,
and the volatile qualifier was invented precisely to
draw the line at actually performing the coded
accesses to the variable whether or not the result
is further used in the program.