I believe this to be a (minor) defect in the C++11 Standard
c++, c++11, language-lawyer
Solution
Too long for a comment
In clause 7, paragraph 3:
In a simple-declaration, the optional init-declarator-list can be omitted only when declaring a class (Clause 9) or enumeration (7.2), that is, when the decl-specifier-seq contains either a class-specifier, an elaborated-type-specifier with a class-key (9.1), or an enum-specifier. In these cases and whenever a class-specifier or enum-specifier is present in the decl-specifier-seq, the identifiers in these specifiers are among the names being declared by the declaration (as class-names, enum-names, or enumerators, depending on the syntax). In such cases, and except for the declaration of an unnamed bit-field (9.6), the decl-specifier-seq shall introduce one or more names into the program, or shall redeclare a name introduced by a previous declaration.
And in clause 7, paragraph 9
Only in function declarations for constructors, destructors, and type conversions can the decl-specifier-seq be omitted.
Problem
I believe this to be a (minor) defect in the C++11 Standard. In [dcl.dcl] we have: simple-declaration: decl-specifier-seqopt init-declarator-listopt ; The decl-specifier-seq can't be optional. For instance the snippet below doesn't compile: ``` x; ``` If I'm correct here, then the beginning of paragraph §8.3/1 should also be altered: From: A list of declarators appears after an optional (Clause 7) decl-specifier-seq (7.1). To: A list of declarators appears after a decl-specifier-seq (7.1).