@BRIAN_____ Who told you that? A raw pointer definitely isn't treated as volatile. It would make everything incredibly slow.
@CopperheadSec One can't avoid the C way of doing things, AFAICT, because you need a modifier—volatile—to say “don't touch this buffer.”
-
-
@BRIAN_____ Compare the LLVM IR produced by Clang and the Rust compiler though. LLVM IR is more than an implementation detail of LLVM. -
@BRIAN_____ If there isn't anything missing in the Rust code, then it's not a missing feature unless Clang's volatile isn't correct. -
@BRIAN_____ It's true that it might be necessary at some point in the future if the Rust compiler started doing transformations itself. -
@BRIAN_____ Or LLVM IR could be redefined in a backwards incompatible way to be more aggressive, requiring different IR from frontends. -
@BRIAN_____ At the moment though, it's really not needed. AFAIK, LLVM still only has the volatile load and store operations (+ copy, etc.). -
@BRIAN_____ Changes to the LLVM IR semantics could impact Rust in far bigger ways than volatile semantics though. Can't really plan for it.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.