http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56976
--- Comment #3 from Daniel Krügler <daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com> --- (In reply to Akim Demaille from comment #2) You are right, I misread your code example in the haste. I agree that this is not related to CWG 1604 (we have no mixed case) and I think it is clear that both initializations should be accepted, it should be a direct binding, because we fall into 8.5.4 p3 b5: "Otherwise, if the initializer list has a single element of type E and [..] its referenced type is reference-related to E, the object or reference is initialized from that element;"
