... alternately, if the substance of my patchlet is right, we could simplify a bit the logic per the below.

Thanks,
Paolo.

/////////////////////
Index: cp/call.c
===================================================================
--- cp/call.c   (revision 236309)
+++ cp/call.c   (working copy)
@@ -6377,8 +6377,9 @@ convert_like_real (conversion *convs, tree expr, t
        /* When converting from an init list we consider explicit
           constructors, but actually trying to call one is an error.  */
        if (DECL_NONCONVERTING_P (convfn) && DECL_CONSTRUCTOR_P (convfn)
+           && BRACE_ENCLOSED_INITIALIZER_P (expr)
            /* Unless this is for direct-list-initialization.  */
-           && !DIRECT_LIST_INIT_P (expr)
+           && !CONSTRUCTOR_IS_DIRECT_INIT (expr)
            /* And in C++98 a default constructor can't be explicit.  */
            && cxx_dialect >= cxx11)
          {
Index: testsuite/g++.dg/template/crash122.C
===================================================================
--- testsuite/g++.dg/template/crash122.C        (revision 0)
+++ testsuite/g++.dg/template/crash122.C        (working copy)
@@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
+// PR c++/70466
+
+template < class T, class T >  // { dg-error "conflicting" }
+class A
+{
+public:
+  explicit A (T (S::*f) ()) {}  // { dg-error "expected" }
+};
+
+template < class T, class S > 
+A < T, S > foo (T (S::*f) ())
+{
+  return A < T, S > (f);
+}
+
+class B
+{
+public:
+  void bar () {}
+};
+
+int
+main ()
+{
+  foo (&B::bar);
+  return 0;
+}

Reply via email to