[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: 4 week-old pretest bugs

From: Jan Djärv
Subject: Re: 4 week-old pretest bugs
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2007 12:07:53 +0100
User-agent: Thunderbird (X11/20070102)

Richard Stallman skrev:
    So, in order for BLOCK_INPUT to work reliably, it seems that
    interrupt_input_blocked should be declared as volatile (or maybe
    `volatile sig_atomic_t' instead of `volatile int') because it is
    accessed from a signal handler.

Isn't it the case that the C spec calls for this to be volatile?

Quote form the C standard:

"The type defined is
which is the (possibly volatile-qualified) integer type of an object that can
be accessed as an atomic entity, even in the presence of asynchronous

However, Neither glibc or Solaris has volatile in the definition. I think the thing guaranteed is "accessed", not "modified".

        Jan D.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]