From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 84354386102F; Thu, 27 May 2021 11:45:00 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 84354386102F From: "sbence92 at gmail dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/100800] New: ternary operator doesn't accept T with conversion operator and nullptr Date: Thu, 27 May 2021 11:45:00 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: new X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: c++ X-Bugzilla-Version: 11.1.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: sbence92 at gmail dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: bug_id short_desc product version bug_status bug_severity priority component assigned_to reporter target_milestone cf_gcchost cf_gcctarget cf_gccbuild Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 May 2021 11:45:00 -0000 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D100800 Bug ID: 100800 Summary: ternary operator doesn't accept T with conversion operator and nullptr Product: gcc Version: 11.1.0 Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P3 Component: c++ Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org Reporter: sbence92 at gmail dot com Target Milestone: --- Host: x86_64-w64-mingw32, x86_64-linux-gnu Target: x86_64-w64-mingw32, x86_64-linux-gnu Build: x86_64-w64-mingw32, x86_64-linux-gnu The following code fails to compile with the following message: error: operands to '?:' have different types 'S2' and 'std::nullptr_t' Even though S2 is convertible to S* and nullptr is convertible to S* so they have a common type to convert to. Also the standard mentions that pointer conversion rules are applied to bring the second and third operand to a com= mon type, so this code seems to be valid. FYI clang and icc accepts this, msvc and gcc doesn't. struct S{}; struct S2 { operator S*(); }; S* f() { return true ? S2{} : nullptr; }=