On Fri, May 05, 2006 at 04:29:53AM -0700, Gary Funck wrote:
> ... where, when incrmenting the non-volatile 'j', it chosses 'addl'
> over 'incl'.
Pentium 4 is stupid that way; addl is faster.
r~
> From: Bernd Jendrissek
> Sent: Friday, May 05, 2006 12:50 AM
[...]
> Systems programmers should know better than to expect a particular
> implementation of volatile. :)
>
> How, for example, would you suggest GCC generate code for this?
>
> volatile int qwerty;
>
> void p()
> {
> printf("q
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 02:45:50PM -0700, Gary Funck wrote:
> Beginning with this simple example,
>
> 1 int j;
> 2 volatile int jv;
> 3 void p()
> 4 {
> 5++j;
> 6++jv;
> 7 }
>
> when compiled with "gcc
On May 4, 2006, at 2:45 PM, Gary Funck wrote:
I've been looking at how GCC 4.0 handles "volatile" internally,
and may have a question/two on that later, but in the meantime,
I noticed some interesting differences in generated code that I
thought were a bit unusual, and was wondering if someone he
