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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,c4cb2c432feebd9d
X-Google-Thread: 1094ba,c4cb2c432feebd9d
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,gid1094ba,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!wn14feed!worldnet.att.net!bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net.POSTED!b680011b!not-for-mail
From: Dick Hendrickson <dick.hendrickson@att.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US;
 rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.fortran
Subject: Re: Bounds Check Overhead
References: <mubcg.13522$fb2.853@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>
   <epcs4e.qb8.ln@hunter.axlog.fr>   <tHkcg.6937$kR6.484@trnddc05>
   <0ugu4e.4i7.ln@hunter.axlog.fr>
   <PkHcg.90575$Fs1.7198@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
   <To_cg.10095$S7.4017@news-server.bigpond.net.au>
   <%P_cg.155733$eR6.26337@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
   <6H9dg.10258$S7.9150@news-server.bigpond.net.au>
   <XVadg.76594$_S7.45873@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>
   <1hfv5wb.1x4ab1tbdzk7eN%nospam@see.signature>
   <pan.2006.05.25.12.11.52.919554@linuxchip.demon.co.uk.uk.uk>
   <4475DA61.3080001@comcast.net>   <m2mzd569l9.fsf@grendel.local>
   <44762F55.4050106@cits1.stanford.edu>   <87hd3d1472.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>
   <3cBdg.6255$oa3.2407@trnddc08>
   <SuEdg.167361$eR6.86840@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
 <1148655583.421963.226740@j55g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <1148655583.421963.226740@j55g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <rTEdg.167474$eR6.62378@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 7ff879467453a590abe433bc31659d13
X-Complaints-To: abuse@worldnet.att.net
X-Trace: bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net 1148656215
 7ff879467453a590abe433bc31659d13 (Fri, 26 May 2006 15:10:15 GMT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 15:10:15 GMT
Organization: AT&T Worldnet
Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 15:10:15 GMT
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:4497 comp.lang.fortran:10294
Date: 2006-05-26T15:10:15+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>



gary.l.scott@lmco.com wrote:

> So should I be prevented from having the volatile attribute in common
> (a common place for it to be in old code)?
> 
Well, personally, I think you should be prevented from
having either common or volatile in a program.  But, that's
probably not what your question is about ;) .

The true answer is no, mixing volatile and common is a
fine way to program.  You merely need to make sure that
your other processes don't volatile a variable when it is
being used as a DO index.

Dick Hendrickson