------- Comment #6 from redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2010-04-12 11:19 ------- (In reply to comment #5) > you're writing a smart pointer class in C++, users expect that you will > support > all the same operators with all the same semantics.
do you mean that users expect this? volatile SmartPtr& SmartPtr::operator=(const SmartPtr&) volatile; I'm not sure I agree -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=7614
