When I implemented explicit(bool) in r9-3735, I added this code to
add_template_candidate_real:
+ /* Now the explicit specifier might have been deduced; check if this
+ declaration is explicit. If it is and we're ignoring non-converting
+ constructors, don't add this function to the set of candidates. */
+ if ((flags & LOOKUP_ONLYCONVERTING) && DECL_NONCONVERTING_P (fn))
+ return NULL;
but as this test demonstrates, that's incorrect when we're initializing
from a {}: for list-initialization we consider explicit constructors and
complain if one is chosen.
PR c++/109159
gcc/cp/ChangeLog:
* call.cc (add_template_candidate_real): Add explicit decls to the
set of candidates when the initializer is a braced-init-list.
libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
* testsuite/20_util/pair/cons/explicit_construct.cc: Adjust dg-error.
* testsuite/20_util/tuple/cons/explicit_construct.cc: Likewise.
* testsuite/23_containers/span/explicit.cc: Likewise.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* g++.dg/cpp0x/explicit16.C: New test.
a226590fef