On 07/02/2014 03:34 PM, Trevor Saunders wrote:
On Wed, Jul 02, 2014 at 09:28:03PM +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote:
it seems to me this doesn't get at the real issue that the type names
are the same but the fields are different. maybe "a type of the same
name with different fields defined here"?
This is what I print when I see name mismatch. It usually means completely
different structure/field.
It speaks of fields names rather than type names. Better wording is welcome.
I was sort of suggesting that part I quoted, but its not great either.
maybe
note: First differing member of $whatever defined here
?
I think that would be better. The problem is that the different
BufferedMsg definitions are not equivalent by the ODR rules, so the
primary error should be about BufferedMsg, followed by information about
the differing data members.
Jason
