From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id DF2183858D20; Sat,  3 Dec 2022 18:22:00 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org DF2183858D20
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1670091720;
	bh=cfuKmN3Mxeeo8tm20yOgfscbzTEku22NPOJmwNoGvrA=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=YpMnUxJg0ofVG8lVu7HuZgZ4jOhzSN/L0GgHtgi9pUxCRCk2MWPMhifIgz9ffLy0o
	 LIDMcNPIqAeIOuHaSeKZ2PXsv6JBXRb1Z4EGXRAmPvSEaBtS+AfXAcqJIVtkPJNFyG
	 bFcP41+tIM1ev79Emn1XbiL9ARu61R/5QFvgfIw0=
From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/107958] Ambiguity with uniform initialization in overloaded
 operator and explicit constructor
Date: Sat, 03 Dec 2022 18:22:00 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: c++
X-Bugzilla-Version: unknown
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
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: 
Message-ID: <bug-107958-4-2ELPodZ5xh@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-107958-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-107958-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
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
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D107958

--- Comment #5 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Actually I think there is some disagreement if dcl.init.list/3.4 (that is
aggregate initialization) applies ...

Because if I make the two fields private, then gcc (and MSVC) accepts it ..=
.=