Issue2243

Title 2243. Incorrect use of implicit conversion sequence
Status drafting Section 8.2.9 [expr.static.cast]
Submitter Hubert Tong

Created on 2016-03-08.00:00:00 by admin, last changed by admin.

Messages
msg5870 (view) Date: 2016-12-15.00:00:00

Notes from the December, 2016 teleconference:

The problem is that overload resolution relies on copy initalization and thus does not describe direct initialization. See also issue 1781.

msg5869 (view) Date: 2018-02-27.00:00:00

The term “implicit conversion sequence” is now used in some non-call contexts (e.g., 8.2.9 [expr.static.cast] paragraph 4, 8.16 [expr.cond] paragraph 4, 8.10 [expr.eq] paragraph 4)) and it is not clear that the current definition is suited for these additional uses. In particular, passing an argument in a function call is always copy-initialization, but some of these contexts require consideration of direct-initialization.

History
Date User Action Args
2018-02-27 00:00:00adminsetstatus: open -> drafting
section: 5.2.9 [expr.static.cast] -> 8.2.9 [expr.static.cast]
2017-02-06 00:00:00adminsetmessages: + msg5870
2016-03-08 00:00:00admincreate