Why in C++ extra method qualification is not allowed?

Question

Is there a reason we can not write in C++

class MyClass
{
public:
    void MyClass::MyMethod();  // <----
}

it gives 'extra qualification' or some such compile error but is there a reason for that or it's just so happened?

Because that's how the language is defined. Why would you want to do that? — Oliver Charlesworth, May 31 '13 at 10:59
Its a reasonable question, and 2nd paragraph of Mike Seymour's reply gives an answer. — Anton Belov, May 31 '13 at 11:23
Strange that my question got so many downvotes and close requests. 'Because that's how the language is defined' hmm... because God has said so... Normally they have a good reason beyond every grammatical decision. — Alexander Kulyakhtin, May 31 '13 at 11:32
I would not WANT to do that I did that once by mistake and then I thought but it's a tautology, why it's forbidden then. Anyway, the question has now been answered. — Alexander Kulyakhtin, May 31 '13 at 11:39

score 6 · Accepted Answer · answered May 31 '13 at 11:02

Because that's the syntax for declarations; they declare an unqualified name to have a particular meaning within the scope of the declaration.

If a scope qualification were allowed, it would always be either redundant (specifying the current scope) or wrong (since you can't declare something in another scope).

score 4 · Answer 2 · answered May 31 '13 at 10:59

The reason is that it is illegal syntax. Besides, why would you need to add a redundant extra qualification?

The member function is being declared in the context of the class definition, explicitly qualifying it as a member function of that class is unnecessary - and it compromises readability.

Why in C++ extra method qualification is not allowed?

2 Answers2

Linked