I hope Mr. Stroustrup can give an answer to this question:
What was rationale behind the requirements to use an ampersand and a fully
qualified name of a function, to form a pointer to a member function? Is
there any syntax ambiguity without those? MS C++ compiler is quite happy
when a plain function name is used (I haven't tried it in ANSI compliance
mode, though), so for long time I've been pretty sure that it's OK...
What was rationale behind the requirements to use an ampersand and a fully
qualified name of a function, to form a pointer to a member function? Is
there any syntax ambiguity without those? MS C++ compiler is quite happy
when a plain function name is used (I haven't tried it in ANSI compliance
mode, though), so for long time I've been pretty sure that it's OK...