Structure layout isn't the hard part, it's having the rest of the language cope with the ambiguity of everything.

  // Things.h
  namespace Foo { class A { C* c; }; }
  namespace Bar { class B { C* c; }; }

Are A::c and B::c the same type?

  // TU1.cpp
  class C {};

Were you right?

  // TU2.cpp
  namespace Foo { class C {}; }
  namespace Bar { class C {}; }

What about now?

  // TU3.cpp
  class C {};
  namespace Foo { class C {}; }
  namespace Bar { class C {}; }

This may get you shot, but is legal. What about now?

Ahh - all three are in the same program. Just pretend they #included <c.h>, <foo/c.h>, and <bar/c.h>. Having A::c's type be different in different contexts is a violation of the "One Definition Rule", for which the punishment is undefined behavior.

Although you can still recreate the above scenarios by just #including <Things.h> after <c.h> and company, but you're a bit more likely to have Things.h #include what it needs to clarify the situation. Hopefully. So maybe we can get away with it!

  void foo() { D * d; }

Is that a pointer definition or invoking operator* against two globals?

  void bar() { E < 42 > e; }

Now you're just fucking with me. Is that some comparison operators or a template?

  void baz() { F < (42) > f; }

That didn't clarify anything. Stop it.

  void he_comes() { G < (42) > g(); }

What do you mean I just declared a function? Stop it!

  v̹̊̈́̇ͦ̌ͭ͂ͅo̅̉̀ͪ̚ī̵̠̘̋d̸͚̪̝̹͙͆͛̿ ͉̜̳ͪͬ́ͣ̌ẑ̸̹̹̩̩a̡̰ͣͭ̄͒ͫ̇̚l̛̹̫͓̣͖͈̐ͬg̢͕̘͙o̪͆̏ͥ͟(̖̭̟̱̰ͩ)̘̬͉̺̉̓ ̦͆́̚{ ̶̪͙̹͈ͮͧ̋ͪͤͅĜ͔̙̉͢ ̝̯ͭ̈́͘<̨͊̂͋̎ ̤͇̼̝͔͇ͯ̑̋ͫ̾͐̚(ͨͪͦ̈̈́ͥ4͍͗̆2̲̞̦̳̖͡)͖͇̟̥ͮ͘ ̺̖͙̘̳͛̐̊͊>̼͍̘̦͖̎ ̧̘̻̭͉̺g̟͓̑ͦ̌̃(̪ͬͪͤ̎̉͘ȉ̮̥͖́n̸̝̪̗̯͇̓̈́̀̔̄̍́t͓̟͍ͨͪ(̰͈̻͎̣͉̀̿̈͑)̝͚̆̃̇)̠̃;̺͎̙̰̈́̏̚͘ ̶̜͍̠̼ͬ}̡̤̰̮̳͈̌͛ͤ̈́

A function accepting a function pointer? Stooooop!