https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107958
--- Comment #4 from Andrew Pinski <pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org> --- I think GCC and MSVC are correct here: [over.match.list]/16.3.1.7 . In copy-listinitialization, if an explicit constructor is chosen, the initialization is ill-formed. [ Note: This differs from other situations (16.3.1.3, 16.3.1.4), where only converting constructors are considered for copy-initialization. This restriction only applies if this initialization is part of the final result of overload resolution. — end note ] Even though the note is techincally not part of the standard, it describes why clang is wrong here. That is the explicit constructors are used too to figure out the overload and only if there was no ambiguous, it would be considered as ill-formed.
