<div dir="ltr">Question's .probably more suitable for cfe-dev, rather than llvm-dev.</div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 2:53 PM TellowKrinkle via llvm-dev <<a href="mailto:llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org">llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Given the following code:<br>
<br>
struct A {};<br>
struct B: public A {<br>
        explicit B(A a) {}<br>
};<br>
struct C: public B {};<br>
B yay(const C& thing) {<br>
        return B(thing);<br>
}<br>
<br>
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<br>
<br>
Which compiler is correct here?<br>
<br>
Live example: <a href="https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/3doW5d" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://gcc.godbolt.org/z/3doW5d</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
LLVM Developers mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev</a><br>
</blockquote></div>