From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <f0b689280c41328e5f1fc2a69d199658@plan9.bell-labs.com>
From: jmk@plan9.bell-labs.com
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] how to avoid a memset() optimization
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 13:55:06 -0500
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 205f9ea4-eacb-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

On Thu Nov 14 13:32:18 EST 2002, tad@entrisphere.com wrote:
>
> someone mentioned something along the lines of
>
> void*
> secmemset(void *buf, int v, int len)
> {
> 	return memset((volatile void*)buf, v, len);
> }
>
> However, isn't GCC going to complain that you're passing
> a volatile to a function that isn't expecting a volatile?
>
> -Tad

Jarring chord. The door flies open and Cardinal Ximinez of Spain enters
flanked by two junior cardinals. Cardinal Biggles has goggles pushed over
his forehead. Cardinal Fang is just Cardinal Fang.

Ximinez:
	Nobody expects the Volatile Inquisition. Our chief weapon is surprise
	that your code doesn't work ... surprise and fear that you forgot an
	optimisation parameter... fear and surprise ... our two weapons are fear
	and surprise ... and ruthless efficiency instead of correctness. Our
	THREE weapons are fear, surprise and ruthless efficiency and an almost
	fanatical devotion to RMS ... Our FOUR ... no ... AMONGST our weaponry
	are such elements as fear, surprise ... I'll come in again.
	(exit and exeunt)