llvm / llvm/llvm-project

[clang] Class gets an implicit default constructor when it has a user-provided constructor

Open
#167,136 1 comment 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub
clang:frontend diverges-from:msvc
Dominant language
LLVM
Stars
40.5k
Forks
18.7k
PR merge metrics
PR metrics pending

Description

The following code doesn't compile due to failed static assertion in Clang, but does compile in MSVC:
```C++
struct A
{
template
constexpr A() noexcept {}
};

struct B : A
{
using A::A;
explicit constexpr B(int) noexcept {}
};

struct C : B
{
using B::B;

template
constexpr C() noexcept : a(1) {}

int a = 0;
};

static_assert(C().a == 1);
```
This is not standard compliant, that code should compile. According to the standard A's constructor is not a default constructor per-se, as in "special member function" kind of default constructor -- it is a template for a constructor that takes no arguments, thus A does not have an implicit default constructor, so nor should B which inherits from it and its constructor using the `using` declaration. But clang seems to think here that because A is default-constructible (which it is, despite not having "real" default constructor), that B should get an implicit default constructor.

Contributor guide

Open the contributing guide

Assessment

This issue has not been assessed yet.

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.