new foo::foo() erroneous, ugly, or OK?

hello, world\n

gcc accepts the following code, while
FlexeLint 8.00u reports an error:

$ cat foo.cpp
class foo {
public:
     foo() { }
};

int main (void)
{
     foo *myfoo = new foo::foo();
     delete myfoo;
     return 0;
}

---snip---

FlexeLint for C/C++ (Unix) Vers. 8.00u, Copyright
Gimpel Software 1985-2006

--- Module: foo.cpp (C++)
                                  _
         foo *myfoo = new foo::foo();
foo.cpp 8 Error 1018: Expected a type after 'new'
[...]

I'm not a C++ expert, so my question to the resident AI is:
Is this in fact an error, or does the C++ standard
allow this syntactically/semantically?
Of course the remedy is to remove the "foo::", but
nevertheless, isn't FlexeLint too picky or misleading here?
Where on the scale from "erroneous--ugly--unusual--perfectly fine"
is this construct?

Thanks for any clues. Regards,

     Jens

      [ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm for info about ]
      [ comp.lang.c++.moderated. First time posters: Do this! ]