decl.c (add_binding): Don't complain about a redeclaration of a semantically…

decl.c (add_binding): Don't complain about a redeclaration of a semantically identical typedef in a...

	* decl.c (add_binding): Don't complain about a redeclaration of a
	semantically identical typedef in a local scope.

From-SVN: r27213

gcc/cp/ChangeLog

+1999-05-28  Mark Mitchell  <mark@codesourcery.com>
+
+	* decl.c (add_binding): Don't complain about a redeclaration of a
+	semantically identical typedef in a local scope.
+
 1999-05-28  Nathan Sidwell  <nathan@acm.org>
 
 	* decl.c (complete_array_type): Allocate off same obstack. Fix

gcc/cp/decl.c

@@ -1143,6 +1143,20 @@ add_binding (id, decl)
       BINDING_VALUE (binding) = decl;
       INHERITED_VALUE_BINDING_P (binding) = 0;
     }
+  else if (TREE_CODE (BINDING_VALUE (binding)) == TYPE_DECL
+	   && TREE_CODE (decl) == TYPE_DECL
+	   && DECL_NAME (decl) == DECL_NAME (BINDING_VALUE (binding))
+	   && same_type_p (TREE_TYPE (decl),
+			   TREE_TYPE (BINDING_VALUE (binding))))
+    /* We have two typedef-names, both naming the same type to have
+       the same name.  This is OK because of:
+
+         [dcl.typedef]
+
+	 In a given scope, a typedef specifier can be used to redefine
+	 the name of any type declared in that scope to refer to the
+	 type to which it already refers.  */
+    ok = 0;
   else
     {
       cp_error ("declaration of `%#D'", decl);

gcc/testsuite/g++.old-deja/g++.other/typedef7.C

+// Build don't link:
+// Origin: Mark Mitchell <mark@codesourcery.com>
+
+typedef int I;
+typedef int I;
+
+struct A {
+  typedef int I;
+  typedef int I;
+};
+
+template <class T>
+struct S {
+  typedef int I;
+  typedef int I;
+};
+