Newer gcc swallow version control keywords

[Oleg Goldshmidt]

Shachar Shemesh <shachar at shemesh.biz> writes:

> Just tested it myself. It does, indeed, not work. I wonder why? 
> Seems like it SHOULD work. After all, that's what volatile is for,
> right?

I suspected that const was more important than volatile, but it looks
(after I removed const) that what overrules volatile is the fact that
nothing uses the static variable (or const) - the compiler does not
care that it was declared volatile.

-- 
Oleg Goldshmidt | pub at goldshmidt.org