17 Oct
2008
17 Oct
'08
6:12 p.m.
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 08:36:56PM +0200, Olivier Guilyardi wrote:
I don't see why it's fragile. There's no
reason for the compiler to modify
rb->read_ptr if not asked to. Buf if that's the case, because of some sort of
dark voodoo optimization, then we could use a temporary variable to hold the
intermediary result. Better, all computation could be done on this temporary
variable and transfered into rb->read_ptr once finished, so that modifying the
later only involves memory copy.
There is no reason indeed, and only a completely braindead
compiler would do it unless forced to, but it is not formally
excluded unless you make read_ptr volatile. Using a temporary
variable doesn't change the picture at all.
Ciao,
--
FA
Laboratorio di Acustica ed Elettroacustica
Parma, Italia
Lascia la spina, cogli la rosa.