Now let’s consider the following example.
 
void g( const int ( & )[][2] )
{
    std::cout << "void g( const int ( & )[][2] )\n";
}
void g( const int ( & )[2][2] )
{
    std::cout << "void g( const int ( & )[2][2] )\n";
}
 
//…
 
g( { 1, 2, 3 } );
 
The MS VS 2019 issues an error that it is unable to convert the initializer list for either function.
 
Is it a compiler bug or does it behave correctly? In the last case what is the explanation of such a behavior?
 
With best regards,
Vlad from Moscow
You can meet me at http://cpp.forum24.ru/ or www.stackoverflow.com or http://ru.stackoverflow.com
 
 
Четверг, 10 июня 2021, 15:37 +03:00 от Edward Catmur <ecatmur@googlemail.com>:
 
On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 at 13:28, Vladimir Grigoriev via Std-Discussion <std-discussion@lists.isocpp.org> wrote:
Also is it this rule valid for designated initializations?
 
For example if we have
 
struct A
{
    int x, z;
};
struct B
{
    int x, y, z;
};
void g( const A & )
{
    std::cout << "void g( const A & )\n";
}
void g( const B & )
{
    std::cout << "void g( const B & )\n";
}
 
then is this call
 
    g( { .x = 1, .z = 2 } );
 
ambiguous or the function with the parameter const A & will be called?
 
A and B are not array types, so [over.ics.rank]/3.1.2 does not apply.
 
Indeed, all the compilers agree that the call is ambiguous.