It's the other way around. Implicit conversion is syntactic sugar for explicit conversion. Sugar is anything that is functionally identical, just notated more conveniently.
That said, I think you're correct about the casting versus conversion distinction. Languages frequently overload established terminology with slightly modified variants and it's incredibly confusing.
That said, I think you're correct about the casting versus conversion distinction. Languages frequently overload established terminology with slightly modified variants and it's incredibly confusing.