Re: [Boost-users] time_period constructor question

From: Jeff Garland (jeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-01-26 23:11:19

On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 20:04:57 +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote
> Jeff Garland wrote:
> > Yeah, you are correct it is treating it as a function declaration.  This feel
> > like a gcc bug to me, but there could be some obscure reason why it's that way
> > that I'm unaware of.
> <snip>
> 
> This is correct behaviour.  The above declaration declares t2 as a 
> function taking two parameters of type ptime (irrelevantly named 
> min_date_time and max_date_time).  Any compiler that doesn't parse 
> it as that is broken.

So enlighten me.  Why would parenthesis be allowed in the function definition
/ name? Can't say I've ever seen that syntax used before.  What's the
advantage -- I can see the downside.  

Jeff