http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48323
--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-03-28 22:25:00 UTC --- (In reply to comment #4) > (In reply to comment #3) > Sorry for being pedantic, but would you care to explain how your observation > renders this report invalid? I am afraid I do not understand this resolution. > > Do you assert that the two cases (static local in global vs. class scope > function) are deliberately treated differently? If so, is this an > implementation choice, or is it based on a document that I should have read > (which one)? Yes they are different because C::class_scope_f is a vague linkage while global_f is global linkage. So the i in each one is of different linkage. If you want C type to be local to the shared, then you need to use either the hidden attribute on it or use -fvisibility=hidden.
