🚀 go-pugleaf

Does the standards committee consider this code ambiguous:

  struct X;
  struct Y
  {
      operator X*();
      operator const X*() const;
  };
  void* f(Y y)
  {
      return y; //10
  }

A couple compilers (different vendors) say it /is/ ambiguous, but I can't see
why.  Shouldn't the compiler decide that `y.operator X*()' is a better choice
because `y' is not `const'--just as for other overload resolution?

(In particular, gcc says
  x.C:10: ambiguous conversion from `Y' to `void *'
  x.C:10:   candidate conversion functions include `const X *' and `X *'
.)

Michael.
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  Submission address: std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu.
  Contact address: std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  The moderation policy
  is summarized in http://dogbert.lbl.gov/~matt/std-c++/policy.html. ]