https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114438
--- Comment #3 from anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org --- The same text existed in F2018, so it is not new: F2018:C7103 and Note 1. Either every compiler developer team misunderstood that clause, or we need an interp, based on the example, to be able to convince all of them. (I know of developers who do overwrite default constructors, and it currently works "everywhere", so clarification is important.) What do you think?
