dominik nussbaumer

I noticed that operators with no arguments in classes fail to parse when a requires clause is used. The current development version also fails to parse this. Here are two failing minimal examples and one that parses fine. template <typename T> struct test { operator int() requires true { return 0; } }; example.cpp:2:32: error: syntax error: operator [syntaxError] operator int() requires true { return 0; } ^ Active checkers: There was critical errors template <typename T> struct test { bool operator()()...

I noticed that operators with no arguments in classes fail to parse when a requires clause is used. The current development version also fails to parse this. Here are two failing minimal examples and one that parses fine. template <typename T> struct test { operator int() requires true { return 0; } }; example.cpp:2:32: error: syntax error: operator [syntaxError] operator int() requires true { return 0; } ^ Active checkers: There was critical errors template <typename T> struct test { bool operator()()...