https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18199
--- Comment #6 from John Belmonte <j...@neggie.net> ---
Here is my understanding of the current code's intention. When presented with
"MyType foo = { ... }", the parser must infer whether the RHS is a struct
initializer or a 0-parameter function literal without knowing anything about
MyType. A contrived example of the two cases, respectively:
// RHS is struct initializer (e.g. MyType is struct with a string field)
static MyType foo = {
"a" + "b",
};
// RHS is function literal (e.g. MyType is alias of void function())
static MyType bar = {
"a" + "b";
};
So the implementation uses the presence of semicolon or return tokens to infer
that the RHS is a function literal. However that solution yields the wrong
answer when a struct initializer happens to hold certain forms of function
literals.
To fix this the parser may require an isFunctionLiteral() at least handling the
"{ ... }" form. A caveat with this approach is that a malformed function
literal will be parsed as a struct initializer, yielding confusing error
reports.
--
