------- Comment #8 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2009-08-04 22:42 ------- (In reply to comment #7) > > It might be an improvement if GCC gave different diagnostics for the case > where > a suitable conversion sequence exists but cannot be used because it would > create an rvalue which cannot bind to a non-const reference, and the case > where > there is no suitable conversion (i.e. the types are unrelated)
I don't even know if we have different codepaths for those! > That seems to be what 2.95 attempted to do by saying "initializing 'blah' with > 'blah' will use a temporary" but I find that message confusing, as it *won't* > use a temporary because doing so is not valid. The message should really have > been something like "initializing 'blah' with 'blah' would use a temporary, > but > that's not allowed" Agreed. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13979
