From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,c78177ec2e61f4ac X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: cwr@cts.com (Will Rose) Subject: Re: ada and robots Date: 1997/06/25 Message-ID: <867213635.173150@optional.cts.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 252392512 Cache-Post-Path: optional.cts.com!cwr@crash-i2.cts.com References: <97061611223212@psavax.pwfl.com> Organization: CTS Network Services (CTSNET), San Diego, CA Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-06-25T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Joe Gwinn (gwinn@res.ray.com) wrote: [...] : All C compilers provide the "volatile" attribute, which one can apply to a : (static) variable, and I've never heard of a C compiler that got it wrong : surviving for long. I don't recall if volatile is in Kernigan and Richie, : but it's probably in ANSI C. I think I'll look it up. Volatile is strictly ANSI - I think it may even have been backformed from C++. An ANSI compiler will reserve it, and a conformant ANSI compiler will implement it correctly... Will (not cynical at all, no, no, why would you think that?) cwr@crash.cts.com