I think the parser approach is more correct.
On 06/09/2014 07:02 PM, Paolo Carlini wrote:
!TYPE_WAS_ANONYMOUS (class_type)
+ && !friend_p
&& constructor_name_p (unqualified_name,
class_type))
But here you also need to check qualifying_scope; 'friend' does not
affect whether or not a qualified-id is a constructor.
+ friend_p
+ /* With -fpermissive we want to accept:
+ struct S {
+ struct T{};
+ friend S::S(T);
+ };
+
+ thus also check the return type
+ to do the right thing later in
+ cp_parser_direct_declarator. */
+ && decl_specifiers.type);
And then you don't need to consider decl_specifiers.type here.
Jason
