[dcl.array] p8 A contradictory example and the rule should be improved

[dcl.array] p8 says

Furthermore, if there is a reachable declaration of the entity that inhabits the same scope in which the bound was specified, an omitted array bound is taken to be the same as in that earlier declaration, and similarly for the definition of a static data member of a class.

Consider the example

struct S {
  static int y[10];
};
int S::y[];             // OK, bound is 10

It's not true. Since the declaration outside the class definition does not inhabit the same scope as the initial declaration does. Since [basic.scope.scope] p2 says

Unless otherwise specified:

• [...]
• A declaration inhabits the immediate scope at its locus ([basic.scope.pdecl]).

The locus of the second declaration is immediately after the complete declarator, the scope it inhabits is the namespace scope. Moreover, [dcl.meaning.general] p3.1 strongly implies this point

If the id-expression in the declarator-id of the declarator is a qualified-id Q, let S be its lookup context ([basic.lookup.qual]); the declaration shall inhabit a namespace scope.

The comment is just wrong. If the comments are the intent. We might say

Furthermore, if there is a reachable declaration D to which the name is bound in the same scope in which the name introduced by another declaration D0 that omits the array bound is bound, where D and D0 declares the same entity and D specifies the array bound, the omitted array bound is taken to be the same as D.

extern int x[10];
void f() {
  extern int x[];  // the name is bound in this scope rather than global namespace
  int i = sizeof(x);    // error: incomplete object type
}

The earlier declaration implies that the declaration with the specified bound should be declared before another declaration that omits the bound, which rejects this valid example

extern int arr[];
int arr[10];
int i = sizeof(arr);

@jensmaurer @opensdh

Read [dcl.array] p8 alongside [basic.scope.scope] p2 and [dcl.meaning.general] p3.1, then compare the two array-declaration examples in the issue. Done means the wording no longer contradicts the static data member example and still permits a bound to be specified after an omitted bound.