http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53611
--- Comment #3 from Kirby Zhou <kirbyz...@sogou-inc.com> 2012-06-09 09:43:09 UTC --- If "myopen" returns "__cook", I will agree with you. But "myopen" returns "__cook *", just a pointer. I do not think it is reasonable to hide "myopen". It is a usual method to hide the implementation detail of cook_t, but exports some free function to operate with cook_t*, such as "FILE *". (In reply to comment #2) > I think this is expected behavior as if someone defines a "__cook" in the > executable which links to the shared library, it will be considered a > different > type.
