From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26845 invoked by alias); 29 Jul 2004 02:33:23 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 26838 invoked by uid 48); 29 Jul 2004 02:33:22 -0000 Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 02:33:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20040729023322.26837.qmail@sourceware.org> From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20040726181156.16721.macro@linux-mips.org> References: <20040726181156.16721.macro@linux-mips.org> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/16721] [3.5 Regression] Accesses to volatile objects optimized away X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2004-07/txt/msg03438.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-07-29 02:33 ------- Well we do not document what we do for volatiles so ... http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Qualifiers-implementation.html#Qualifiers-implementation But we do document the extension to c++ because in C++ there cannot happen: http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Volatiles.html#Volatiles -- What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Component|c |tree-optimization http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16721