> Ah, yes. So we should share the parsing of the decl-specifier-seq with the
> C-style for loop, which allows us to avoid the tentative parsing.
That was my original idea, but the C-style loop calls
cp_parser_simple_declaration(), that shouts at the ':'. So we should
either modify it to accept the ':' or split it in two. Both options
are well beyond my intentions.
Anyway the C-style for loop does use tentative parsing, so you don't
avoid it completely.
>> Admittedly, this is not a "trailing_return_type", but AFAICT it has
>> exactly the same restrictions.
>
> The restrictions are slightly different; in the case of a trailing return
> type a class-specifier is not one of the expansions, so we don't treat a {
> as beginning a class body. In the case of a type-specifier-seq, we do treat
> it as beginning a class body, but we give an error about it.
Well, the net effect is the same: the tentative parsing is aborted.
Then the C-style loop for parses the code, and it is this that prints
the error message if needed.
Regards.
Rodrigo
