From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27844 invoked by alias); 2 Jul 2005 22:19:32 -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 27831 invoked by uid 48); 2 Jul 2005 22:19:30 -0000 Date: Sat, 02 Jul 2005 22:19:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20050702221930.27830.qmail@sourceware.org> From: "falk at debian dot org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org In-Reply-To: <20050702164323.22278.olivier.baudron@m4x.org> References: <20050702164323.22278.olivier.baudron@m4x.org> Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c/22278] gcc -O2 discards cast to volatile X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-SW-Source: 2005-07/txt/msg00220.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Additional Comments From falk at debian dot org 2005-07-02 22:19 ------- (In reply to comment #8) > I can't imagine a programmer casting into a pointer to volatile without really > meaning it, so if the behavior is not defined by the standard then both > compatibility and the principle of least astonishment seem to suggest reverting > to the old behavior. I agree in principle. It might just turn out to be too hard to guarantee, in which case we might as well document that. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22278