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 983723858C66; Fri, 23 Feb 2024 14:42:33 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 983723858C66
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1708699353;
	bh=tiDdp5QQEUDr5+nyARiT7Vg+2IcVEFEZ8f5WqhYCrWg=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=WaPsfGEhqIUA7OZfEUBI2Xa8BAVtbsTyK4tLTqmZTSEvc31/U44DocaouxJYRJ/Rc
	 XwKEn8aCMSLhNurdjiil1vk8T0FDbfURE+t2I6o47X8ISbaQleJh0k6rMvtkmDKOnC
	 BjLwPi2c8G8K2z+1+de0apDsCNvsTyw4+7IY9Zw4=
From: "de34 at live dot cn" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/114076] list-initialization with assignment expression
 triggers wrong template instanciation
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2024 14:42:33 +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: 13.2.1
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: de34 at live dot cn
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: cc
Message-ID: <bug-114076-4-vPhaq78Y18@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-114076-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-114076-4@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=3D114076

Jiang An <de34 at live dot cn> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |de34 at live dot cn

--- Comment #1 from Jiang An <de34 at live dot cn> ---
Looks like a duplicate of Bug 104850 to me.

GCC cares about the difference between direct/copy of initialization, not
whether list-initialization or not (however, it's unfortunately that
direct-non-list-initialization can't be used).

> In case c, the rejection seems to me to be correct, since here the tempor=
ary
> value must be destroyed by a destructor call.

I don't see why there's even a temporary value since C++17. The prvalue is =
used
to initialize the data member (via temporary materialization). The potential
invocation of destructor should be in the body of constructors.=