On Mon, 2005-11-21 at 21:46, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > > In principle the combiner could make sure that the same number and > type of volatile memory references occur both before and after the > combination, and reject it if not.
It would also have to ensure that the volatile memory operation wasn't moved across any other 'relevant' (for some suitable definition of relevant) memory operation (combine can cause limited re-ordering of load operations, for example). R.
