any consensus on "register" storage class?

[Rob Landley]

On Tuesday 16 May 2006 12:31 pm, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Tue, 16 May 2006, David Daney wrote:
> > My suggestion is to remove register declarations on a case by case
> > basis. This would have the added advantage of not confusing people
> > looking at the register declaration and thinking that it actually
> > does something.
>
> i actually did submit a patch a while back that removed all of the
> "register" declarations, and the result was that the generated
> executables didn't change in size at all.
>
> i can re-submit that (updated) patch if there's any interest.

Yes please.

Although probably the reason the previous one wasn't applicable is that huge 
patches that touch everything tend to have rejected hunks pretty easily.  
Smaller chunks are generally good because at least some of them will then 
apply...

Rob
-- 
Never bet against the cheap plastic solution.