TITLE: Accessibility of private return types


PROBLEM: u865151@student.canberra.edu.au (Burger / John Adrian (ISE))

class Test {
public:
  Test();
private:
  typedef int TestType;
  TestType Works() { return 0; }
  TestType DoesNot();
};

Test::TestType Test::DoesNot() { return 0; }

On all compilers, Works compiles, but on some (gnu in particular, from 
memory), DoesNot returns a compiler error when trying to define it: 
something along the lines of "Test::TestType not accessible out of scope."

I don't see an access violation in the intent (DoesNot is a member of 
Test), just in the syntax (it's used before it's obvious that it's OK).


RESPONSE: clamage@Eng.Sun.COM (Steve Clamage), 23 Jan 95

Under the rules of the ARM, you cannot define Test::DoesNot outside
the class, because the return type is not accessible at file scope.
This makes private types considerably less useful, and the C++

Committee recently adopted the rule that you could define such
functions outside the class. That is, the decision about accessibility
of Test::TestType is delayed until it is known what is being declared.
(There was such a rule already in place for private static members,
and the rules was extended.)