TellowKrinkle via llvm-dev
2020-Aug-30 21:53 UTC
[llvm-dev] Clang/GCC overload resolution disagreement
Given the following code:
struct A {};
struct B: public A {
explicit B(A a) {}
};
struct C: public B {};
B yay(const C& thing) {
return B(thing);
}
Clang uses B’s copy constructor, while GCC refuses to compile, claiming an
ambiguity between B’s copy constructor and the explicit B(A) constructor
Which compiler is correct here?
Live example: https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/3doW5d
David Blaikie via llvm-dev
2020-Aug-31 16:53 UTC
[llvm-dev] Clang/GCC overload resolution disagreement
Question's .probably more suitable for cfe-dev, rather than llvm-dev. On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 2:53 PM TellowKrinkle via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:> Given the following code: > > struct A {}; > struct B: public A { > explicit B(A a) {} > }; > struct C: public B {}; > B yay(const C& thing) { > return B(thing); > } > > Clang uses B’s copy constructor, while GCC refuses to compile, claiming an > ambiguity between B’s copy constructor and the explicit B(A) constructor > > Which compiler is correct here? > > Live example: https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/3doW5d > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200831/1a18416f/attachment.html>