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?

You can meet me at http://cpp.forum24.ru/ or www.stackoverflow.com or http://ru.stackoverflow.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.