[Bug c++/107178] Diagnosis for colon vs semi-colon in a member function declaration

["redi at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107178

Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2022-10-07
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW

--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> GCC diagonstic seems reasonable.

Only from the most mechanical perspective.

> because GCC assumes you started to define a bitfield which is reasonable
> assumention really.

Not really, because the chances of somebody typing ':' instead of ';' is quite
high (they're on the same key on many keyboard layouts) and the chances of
somebody trying to define a bit-field with a function type is practically zero.

Although the parser just sees "bit-field with function type" we can apply some
intelligence and say that's probably not what the user was trying to do. A
simple typo is more likely.

> At least GCC points out the colon and even suggest you started a bitfield
> which is what a colon normally does here ....

But not with a function type.