Re: redeclarations: say "previous" not "first" declaration

[Joel E. Denny]

On Sun, 9 Jul 2006, Akim Demaille wrote:

> > That's what it *says*, but that's not what it does.  The line number of
> > the "first" declaration increases with each new error message.  I just
> > checked Bison 2.3 for %type.
> 
> Arg, sorry.  Then do what you think is most convenient.

I'm not sure it matters which it is, and it's most convenient to leave it 
as it is now: previous.  I wouldn't care if someone switched it though.

As we discussed, I'll convert the merge type clash warnings to errors.

Joel