From owner-freebsd-arch Sun Oct 28 10:27:52 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from raven.mail.pas.earthlink.net (raven.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.39]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F18D237B405; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 10:27:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from dialup-209.245.128.59.dial1.sanjose1.level3.net ([209.245.128.59] helo=mindspring.com) by raven.mail.pas.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 15xuey-0002Ah-00; Sun, 28 Oct 2001 10:27:48 -0800 Message-ID: <3BDC4E53.B823C1BF@mindspring.com> Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2001 10:28:35 -0800 From: Terry Lambert Reply-To: tlambert2@mindspring.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD {Sony} (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mike Smith Cc: Matthew Dillon , arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 64 bit times revisited.. References: <200110281125.f9SBPNv26553@mass.dis.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Mike Smith wrote: > You (mistakenly) assume that the programmer is going to be looking at these > warnings, let alone enable them in the first place. The above code has > worked for decades, why should it change now? The same reason the "volatile fairy" had to go sprinkling the word "volatile" over code that worked for decades so that it wouldn't break the next time it was compiled because of some bogus assumption about the safety of promoting something to a register being the programmer's job instead of the compiler writer's job, what with compiler writers outnumbering the programmers (NOT!), and all? -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message