On 27 November 2016 at 11:33, Arthur O'Dwyer <arthur.j.odwyer@gmail.com> wr=
ote:
> Ville's N4462 seems to be a discussion of the "how to forward
> initializer_list" problem in general, but AFAICT it dates from before the
> adoption of the two-function approach. I don't know where the two-functio=
n
> approach originally came from =E2=80=94 not that I've tried very hard to =
find out.

It's more about "how to the kind of initialization" and especially how
to forward aggregate-initialization.
Adding constructors doesn't help for types that don't have any. It was
well-known at the time of writing
that paper that some parts of the problem space can be solved by
adding constructor signatures
with initializer_list parameters, but that doesn't solve the general proble=
m.

--=20
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/isocpp=
..org/d/msgid/std-proposals/CAFk2RUZy%2B8sf0Jk-mmVLOx_avj2-dhM1X3RuD-0X%2BqL=
s5PB1Kw%40mail.gmail.com.

.