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 B6F083858439; Tue, 19 Mar 2024 17:14:00 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org B6F083858439
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1710868440;
	bh=9Q/IpDyNluBMJH+R6/cvC3abJxDSc/8upm6Bks6fsYk=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=cMPXKju3EjQWhN6BsW818cHBsGlIWqPvU4lG9TkTQtxQgkhciSK5R0EiLt/beVvGQ
	 oNPxo0k4v7zB5wBprRqYzMetT/B1tHKUprGupFRXSOIPwZMXPt9boI4qQEH2ghEMlc
	 fk6bo8bHM8w1BviPo0RiURudGtS63enLJTE2Xks0=
From: "mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/114395] [c++20+] std::is_constructible_v result of const
 reference incorrect
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2024 17:14:00 +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: 14.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: accepts-invalid, wrong-code
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: mpolacek 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-114395-4-yejd0Gqmdx@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-114395-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-114395-4@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=3D114395

--- Comment #6 from Marek Polacek <mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Right, another design principle is that () should work where {} works, and
const B &b{a}; works.  A(b) previously didn't work so it's not really chang=
ing
meaning.  So not a bug IMHO.=