Add type info to more SignatureConformance errors

Author: forki

src/fsharp/FSComp.txt

@@ -113,38 +113,38 @@ ValueNotContainedMutabilityOverridesDiffer,"Module '%s' contains\n    %s    \nbu
 ValueNotContainedMutabilityOneIsConstructor,"Module '%s' contains\n    %s    \nbut its signature specifies\n    %s    \nOne is a constructor/property and the other is not"
 ValueNotContainedMutabilityStaticButInstance,"Module '%s' contains\n    %s    \nbut its signature specifies\n    %s    \nThe compiled representation of this method is as a static member but the signature indicates its compiled representation is as an instance member"
 ValueNotContainedMutabilityInstanceButStatic,"Module '%s' contains\n    %s    \nbut its signature specifies\n    %s    \nThe compiled representation of this method is as an instance member, but the signature indicates its compiled representation is as a static member"
-290,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleNamesDiffer,"The %s definitions in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the names differ"
-291,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleParameterCountsDiffer,"The %s definitions in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the respective type parameter counts differ"
-292,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleAccessibilityDiffer,"The %s definitions in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the accessibility specified in the signature is more than that specified in the implementation"
-293,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleMissingInterface,"The %s definitions in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the signature requires that the type supports the interface %s but the interface has not been implemented"
-294,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleImplementationSaysNull,"The %s definitions in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the implementation says this type may use nulls as a representation but the signature does not"
-294,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleImplementationSaysNull2,"The %s definitions in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the implementation says this type may use nulls as an extra value but the signature does not"
-295,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleSignatureSaysNull,"The %s definitions in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the signature says this type may use nulls as a representation but the implementation does not"
-295,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleSignatureSaysNull2,"The %s definitions in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the signature says this type may use nulls as an extra value but the implementation does not"
-296,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleImplementationSealed,"The %s definitions in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the implementation type is sealed but the signature implies it is not. Consider adding the [<Sealed>] attribute to the signature."
-297,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleImplementationIsNotSealed,"The %s definitions in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the implementation type is not sealed but signature implies it is. Consider adding the [<Sealed>] attribute to the implementation."
-298,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleImplementationIsAbstract,"The %s definitions in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the implementation is an abstract class but the signature is not. Consider adding the [<AbstractClass>] attribute to the signature."
-299,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleSignatureIsAbstract,"The %s definitions in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the signature is an abstract class but the implementation is not. Consider adding the [<AbstractClass>] attribute to the implementation."
-300,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleTypesHaveDifferentBaseTypes,"The %s definitions in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the types have different base types"
-301,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleNumbersDiffer,"The %s definitions in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the number of %ss differ"
-302,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleSignatureDefinesButImplDoesNot,"The %s definitions in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the signature defines the %s '%s' but the implementation does not (or does, but not in the same order)"
-303,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleImplDefinesButSignatureDoesNot,"The %s definitions in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the implementation defines the %s '%s' but the signature does not (or does, but not in the same order)"
-304,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleImplDefinesStruct,"The %s definitions in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the implementation defines a struct but the signature defines a type with a hidden representation"
-305,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleDotNetTypeRepresentationIsHidden,"The %s definitions in the signature and implementation are not compatible because a CLI type representation is being hidden by a signature"
-306,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleTypeIsHidden,"The %s definitions in the signature and implementation are not compatible because a type representation is being hidden by a signature"
-307,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleTypeIsDifferentKind,"The %s definitions in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the types are of different kinds"
-308,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleILDiffer,"The %s definitions in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the IL representations differ"
-309,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleRepresentationsDiffer,"The %s definitions in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the representations differ"
+290,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleNamesDiffer,"The %s definitions in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the names differ. The type is called '%s' in the signature file but '%s' in implementation."
+291,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleParameterCountsDiffer,"The %s definitions for type '%s' in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the respective type parameter counts differ"
+292,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleAccessibilityDiffer,"The %s definitions for type '%s' in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the accessibility specified in the signature is more than that specified in the implementation"
+293,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleMissingInterface,"The %s definitions for type '%s' in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the signature requires that the type supports the interface %s but the interface has not been implemented"
+294,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleImplementationSaysNull,"The %s definitions for type '%s' in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the implementation says this type may use nulls as a representation but the signature does not"
+294,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleImplementationSaysNull2,"The %s definitions for type '%s' in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the implementation says this type may use nulls as an extra value but the signature does not"
+295,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleSignatureSaysNull,"The %s definitions for type '%s' in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the signature says this type may use nulls as a representation but the implementation does not"
+295,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleSignatureSaysNull2,"The %s definitions for type '%s' in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the signature says this type may use nulls as an extra value but the implementation does not"
+296,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleImplementationSealed,"The %s definitions for type '%s' in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the implementation type is sealed but the signature implies it is not. Consider adding the [<Sealed>] attribute to the signature."
+297,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleImplementationIsNotSealed,"The %s definitions for type '%s' in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the implementation type is not sealed but signature implies it is. Consider adding the [<Sealed>] attribute to the implementation."
+298,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleImplementationIsAbstract,"The %s definitions for type '%s' in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the implementation is an abstract class but the signature is not. Consider adding the [<AbstractClass>] attribute to the signature."
+299,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleSignatureIsAbstract,"The %s definitions for type '%s' in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the signature is an abstract class but the implementation is not. Consider adding the [<AbstractClass>] attribute to the implementation."
+300,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleTypesHaveDifferentBaseTypes,"The %s definitions for type '%s' in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the types have different base types"
+301,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleNumbersDiffer,"The %s definitions for type '%s' in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the number of %ss differ"
+302,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleSignatureDefinesButImplDoesNot,"The %s definitions for type '%s' in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the signature defines the %s '%s' but the implementation does not (or does, but not in the same order)"
+303,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleImplDefinesButSignatureDoesNot,"The %s definitions for type '%s' in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the implementation defines the %s '%s' but the signature does not (or does, but not in the same order)"
+304,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleImplDefinesStruct,"The %s definitions for type '%s' in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the implementation defines a struct but the signature defines a type with a hidden representation"
+305,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleDotNetTypeRepresentationIsHidden,"The %s definitions for type '%s' in the signature and implementation are not compatible because a CLI type representation is being hidden by a signature"
+306,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleTypeIsHidden,"The %s definitions for type '%s' in the signature and implementation are not compatible because a type representation is being hidden by a signature"
+307,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleTypeIsDifferentKind,"The %s definitions for type '%s' in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the types are of different kinds"
+308,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleILDiffer,"The %s definitions for type '%s' in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the IL representations differ"
+309,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleRepresentationsDiffer,"The %s definitions for type '%s' in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the representations differ"
 311,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleFieldWasPresent,"The %s definitions for type '%s' in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the field %s was present in the implementation but not in the signature"
-312,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleFieldOrderDiffer,"The %s definitions in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the order of the fields is different in the signature and implementation"
+312,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleFieldOrderDiffer,"The %s definitions for type '%s' in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the order of the fields is different in the signature and implementation"
 313,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleFieldRequiredButNotSpecified,"The %s definitions for type '%s' in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the field %s was required by the signature but was not specified by the implementation"
 314,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleFieldIsInImplButNotSig,"The %s definitions for type '%s' in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the field '%s' was present in the implementation but not in the signature. Struct types must now reveal their fields in the signature for the type, though the fields may still be labelled 'private' or 'internal'."
-315,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleAbstractMemberMissingInImpl,"The %s definitions in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the abstract member '%s' was required by the signature but was not specified by the implementation"
-316,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleAbstractMemberMissingInSig,"The %s definitions in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the abstract member '%s' was present in the implementation but not in the signature"
-317,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleSignatureDeclaresDiffer,"The %s definitions in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the signature declares a %s while the implementation declares a %s"
-318,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleAbbreviationsDiffer,"The %s definitions in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the abbreviations differ: %s versus %s"
-319,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleAbbreviationHiddenBySig,"The %s definitions in the signature and implementation are not compatible because an abbreviation is being hidden by a signature. The abbreviation must be visible to other CLI languages. Consider making the abbreviation visible in the signature."
-320,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleSigHasAbbreviation,"The %s definitions in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the signature has an abbreviation while the implementation does not"
+315,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleAbstractMemberMissingInImpl,"The %s definitions for type '%s' in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the abstract member '%s' was required by the signature but was not specified by the implementation"
+316,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleAbstractMemberMissingInSig,"The %s definitions for type '%s' in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the abstract member '%s' was present in the implementation but not in the signature"
+317,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleSignatureDeclaresDiffer,"The %s definitions for type '%s' in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the signature declares a %s while the implementation declares a %s"
+318,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleAbbreviationsDiffer,"The %s definitions for type '%s' in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the abbreviations differ: %s versus %s"
+319,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleAbbreviationHiddenBySig,"The %s definitions for type '%s' in the signature and implementation are not compatible because an abbreviation is being hidden by a signature. The abbreviation must be visible to other CLI languages. Consider making the abbreviation visible in the signature."
+320,DefinitionsInSigAndImplNotCompatibleSigHasAbbreviation,"The %s definitions for type '%s' in the signature and implementation are not compatible because the signature has an abbreviation while the implementation does not"
 ModuleContainsConstructorButNamesDiffer,"The module contains the constructor\n    %s    \nbut its signature specifies\n    %s    \nThe names differ"
 ModuleContainsConstructorButDataFieldsDiffer,"The module contains the constructor\n    %s    \nbut its signature specifies\n    %s    \nThe respective number of data fields differ"
 ModuleContainsConstructorButTypesOfFieldsDiffer,"The module contains the constructor\n    %s    \nbut its signature specifies\n    %s    \nThe types of the fields differ"