Re: DIP62: Volatile type qualifier for unoptimizable variables in embedded programming
Sean Kelly via Digitalmars-d Thu, 17 Jul 2014 09:21:06 -0700
We had the volatile statement as a compiler barrier in D1. Why
not basically that instead of a type qualifier? We pretty much
need it back for atomics anyway.
- Re: DIP62: Vol... Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d
- Re: DIP62: Vol... Daniel Murphy via Digitalmars-d
- Re: DIP62: Volatile typ... Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d
- Re: DIP62: Volatile... Johannes Pfau via Digitalmars-d
- Re: DIP62: Vol... Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d
- Re: DIP62: Volatile typ... Kagamin via Digitalmars-d
- Re: DIP62: Volatile... bearophile via Digitalmars-d
- Re: DIP62: Vol... Kagamin via Digitalmars-d
- Re: DIP62: Volatile typ... Kagamin via Digitalmars-d
- Re: DIP62: Volatile type qu... ponce via Digitalmars-d
- Re: DIP62: Volatile type qu... Sean Kelly via Digitalmars-d
- Re: DIP62: Volatile typ... Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d
- Re: DIP62: Volatile typ... Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d
- Re: DIP62: Volatile typ... Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d
- Re: DIP62: Volatile... Sean Kelly via Digitalmars-d
- Re: DIP62: Volatile type qualif... safety0ff via Digitalmars-d
- Re: DIP62: Volatile type qualifier f... Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d
- Re: DIP62: Volatile type qualif... Brad Roberts via Digitalmars-d
- Re: DIP62: Volatile type qualif... Mike via Digitalmars-d
- Re: DIP62: Volatile type qualif... Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d
- Re: DIP62: Volatile type qu... Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d
