https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42363
Bug ID: 42363
Summary: Diagnostics for "no matching constructor for
initialization of ''" could be better
Product: clang
Version: trunk
Hardware: PC
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: enhancement
Priority: P
Component: Frontend
Assignee: unassignedclangb...@nondot.org
Reporter: lebedev...@gmail.com
CC: llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org, neeil...@live.com,
richard-l...@metafoo.co.uk
https://godbolt.org/z/xxfpk7
struct A {};
struct B {
explicit B(const A&, int a) {}
};
struct C {
C(const B&) {}
};
void test(const A& a) {
C c(a);
}
It rightfully complains that there is no way to convert A to C,
but never mentions the `explicit B(const A&, int a)`, and that it can't be
used because the value for the second argument is not present.
https://godbolt.org/z/EkOmZq
struct A {};
struct B {
explicit B(const A&, int a = 0) {}
};
struct C {
C(const B&) {}
};
void test(const A& a) {
C c(a);
}
Same story, but even more surprising. It took me a moment to realize that
even if there is a default argument in `B`'s constructor,
it still wants it to be passed.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug._______________________________________________
llvm-bugs mailing list
llvm-bugs@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-bugs
