Consider the following C++ code:
struct B { };
struct A
{
A(int);
A(A&); // missing const is intentional
A(B);
operator B();
};
A f()
{
// return A(1); // compiles fine
return 1; // doesn't compile
}
This compiles fine on MSVC++ 2010 (in fact, on MSVC it even works if I remove B altogether). It doesn’t on GCC 4.6.0:
conv.cpp: In function ‘A f()’:
conv.cpp:13:9: error: no matching function for call to ‘A::A(A)’
conv.cpp:13:9: note: candidates are:
conv.cpp:6:2: note: A::A(B)
conv.cpp:6:2: note: no known conversion for argument 1 from ‘A’ to ‘B’
conv.cpp:5:2: note: A::A(A&)
conv.cpp:5:2: note: no known conversion for argument 1 from ‘A’ to ‘A&’
conv.cpp:4:2: note: A::A(int)
conv.cpp:4:2: note: no known conversion for argument 1 from ‘A’ to ‘int’
What’s confusing me is the message no known conversion for argument 1 from ‘A’ to ‘B’. How can this be true considering that A::operator B() is very well defined?
The error is quite clear on the list of candidates that were rejected. The problem is that implicit conversion sequences involving a user defined conversion in the C++ language are limited to a single user defined conversion:
The standard conversion sequences are defined in §4[conv]:
The problem is that your code cannot get from point a)
intrvalue to point b)Bby applying a single user defined conversion.In particular, all conversion sequences that are available start with a user defined conversion (implicit constructor
A(int)) that yield anArvalue. From there, the rvalue cannot be bound to a non-const reference to callA::A( A& ), so that path is discarded. All the other paths require a second user defined conversion that is not allowed, and in fact the only other path that would get us to point b) requires two other user defined conversions for a total of 3.