C++ use of explicit suggested by cppcheck

[Anna]

Is using the cast constructor bad? Otherweise why a code quality checker (cppcheck in my case) would constantly suggest to add explicit before single parameter constructors?

What if I want to do

class MyClass {
A(int) {}
};

A a = 1;
If I follow the "suggestions" and write

class MyClass {
explicit A(int) {}
};

A a = 1;
would throw an error, but if I use the first I'll have a warning that i've to document to pass the code reviews.

[CHR]

Why don't you write A a{1}; or (more verbose) A a = A{1}?
Non-explicit constructors get flagged to prevent unwanted conversions.

[Daniel Marjamäki]

yes the reason cppcheck warns is because there can be unwanted conversions. Imagine:

void foo(A a);

void dostuff(A* a) {
    foo(a);
}

The function call would do the same thing as : int x = a; A temp(x); foo(temp);. Maybe a compiler will warn about pointer => int conversion not sure.

Cppcheck does not try to detect if there seems to be some mistake it only detects that there is missing explicit keyword.. I do think this is a bit unfortunate. And makes this warning rather noisy.

Well it is your decision. I do not have a strong opinion.. feel free to suppress this warning.