diff options
author | Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com> | 2023-03-17 18:25:13 -0400 |
---|---|---|
committer | Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com> | 2023-03-20 16:54:11 -0400 |
commit | a226590fefb35ed66adf73d85cefe49048a78ab8 (patch) | |
tree | e28402d0be762f0e62247b7c5978b0f4de753961 /gcc/value-range.h | |
parent | 0a846340b99675d57fc2f2923a0412134eed09d3 (diff) | |
download | gcc-a226590fefb35ed66adf73d85cefe49048a78ab8.zip gcc-a226590fefb35ed66adf73d85cefe49048a78ab8.tar.gz gcc-a226590fefb35ed66adf73d85cefe49048a78ab8.tar.bz2 |
c++: explicit ctor and list-initialization [PR109159]
When I implemented explicit(bool) in r9-3735, I added this code to
add_template_candidate_real:
+ /* Now the explicit specifier might have been deduced; check if this
+ declaration is explicit. If it is and we're ignoring non-converting
+ constructors, don't add this function to the set of candidates. */
+ if ((flags & LOOKUP_ONLYCONVERTING) && DECL_NONCONVERTING_P (fn))
+ return NULL;
but as this test demonstrates, that's incorrect when we're initializing
from a {}: for list-initialization we consider explicit constructors and
complain if one is chosen.
PR c++/109159
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
* call.cc (add_template_candidate_real): Add explicit decls to the
set of candidates when the initializer is a braced-init-list.
libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
* testsuite/20_util/pair/cons/explicit_construct.cc: Adjust dg-error.
* testsuite/20_util/tuple/cons/explicit_construct.cc: Likewise.
* testsuite/23_containers/span/explicit.cc: Likewise.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* g++.dg/cpp0x/explicit16.C: New test.
Diffstat (limited to 'gcc/value-range.h')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions