function declaration in parameter list

[evilrat]

On Wednesday, 1 May 2013 at 06:12:54 UTC, Jay Norwood wrote:
> On Saturday, 6 April 2013 at 14:50:50 UTC, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
>> Interesting thread. I've been working on a hand-written D 
>> parser (in Java, for the DDT IDE) and I too have found a slew 
>> of grammar spec issues. Some of them more serious than the 
>> ones you mentioned above. In same cases it's actually not 
>> clear, or downright wrong what the grammar spec says. For 
>> example, here's one off of my notes:
>>
>>  void func(int foo() { } );
>>
>> The spec says that is parsable (basically a function 
>> declaration in the parameter list), which makes no sense, and 
>> DMD doesn't accept.
>
> I'm wondering about the statement above, over in digitalmars.D
> thread, that the declaration makes no sense.
>
> http://dlang.org/expression.html#FunctionLiteral has
> void foo(int function(int) fp);
>
> Is/was void foo(int fp(int){}); intended to be accepted as an
> alternate form of that declaration?

look at signature
void foo(int function(int) fp);

it means "function foo which accepts another function which takes 
one int argument and return int value", and it perfectly fine.

but this(void foo(int fp(int){});) is indeed doesn't work with 
DMD, so it may be just outdated stuff from D1, or someone's 
strange idea(may be inspired by something from java?) or anything 
like that.