Re: volatile and 2 processor

"Chris Friesen" <cbf123@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:ZbadnZDLIc7bcnnVnZ2dnUVZ_uydnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>
>> Sometimes you need volatile for "certain" things in multi-threaded 
>> applications; for instance, the following loop:
>>
>>
>> static atomicword g_running = 1;
>>
>> while (g_running) {
>> }
>>
>>
>> might never terminate if `g_running' was not declared as volatile...
>
> Alternately, you could use locks or barriers and the volatile would not
be 
> necessary.

right.