Parsing issue when creating class object [duplicate]

This question already has an answer here:

• When is a private constructor not a private constructor? 2 answers

Why is it allowed to write Test object(); Test object{}; in case of deleted constructors?

1.When you write Test object(); it doesn't mean that you create class object in case of deleted constructor, compiler understood a function, thats why when you try to write std::cout << sizeof(object) you will get error ISO C++ forbids applying sizeof to an expression of function type. I can understand that it is not deprecated for back-compatibility, but it could be optimized and fixed in C++11 which is not done.

2.Started from C++11, you can create object with Test object3{}; syntax which is already valid object even though deleted constructor and when you do std::cout << sizeof(object3) the output is 1. In this case it means that operator delete is useless.The same about writing it in private section in old versions.

                        ```About Code```

You can use this style of code when you want to create an aggregation of functions and to have encapsulation. So please don't write in answers for example Why do you use class instead of namespace,etc...

class Test {

    Test() = delete;
    Test(const Test&) = delete;
    Test(Test&&) = delete;
    Test& operator=(const Test&) = delete;

public:
    template<typename T>
    static void func();
private:
    static std::string m_fileName;
};

int main() {

   Test object();  //Compiles as function returning Test object
   Test object2;   //Doesn't compile because of deleted constructor
   Test object3{}; //Compiles and it creates an object even though deleted constructor
   Test object4({}); //Doesn't compile because of deleted constructor
   return 0;
}