int numeral -> pointer conversion rules

Question

Consider the following code.

void f(double p) {}
void f(double* p) {}

int main()
{ f(1-1); return 0; }

MSVC 2017 doesn't compile that. It figures there is an ambiguous overloaded call, as 1-1 is the same as 0 and therefore can be converted into double*. Other tricks, like 0x0, 0L, or static_cast<int>(0), do not work either. Even declaring a const int Zero = 0 and calling f(Zero) produces the same error. It only works properly if Zero is not const.

It looks like the same issue applies to GCC 5 and below, but not GCC 6. I am curious if this is a part of C++ standard, a known MSVC bug, or a setting in the compiler. A cursory Google did not yield results.

Answer 1

MSVC considers 1-1 to be a null pointer constant. This was correct by the standard for C++03, where all integral constant expressions with value 0 were null pointer constants, but it was changed so that only zero integer literals are null pointer constants for C++11 with CWG issue 903. This is a breaking change, as you can see in your example and as is also documented in the standard, see [diff.cpp03.conv] of the C++14 standard (draft N4140).

MSVC applies this change only in conformance mode. So your code will compile with the /permissive- flag, but I think the change was implemented only in MSVC 2019, see here.

In the case of GCC, GCC 5 defaults to C++98 mode, while GCC 6 and later default to C++14 mode, which is why the change in behavior seems to depend on the GCC version.

If you call f with a null pointer constant as argument, then the call is ambiguous, because the null pointer constant can be converted to a null pointer value of any pointer type and this conversion has same rank as the conversion of int (or any integral type) to double.