re PR c++/48089 ([C++0x] ICE on in(?)valid in constexpr constructors)

	PR c++/48089
	* semantics.c (potential_constant_expression_1): Change error about
	use of *this in constructor into sorry.

From-SVN: r171687

gcc/cp/ChangeLog

 2011-03-29  Jason Merrill  <jason@redhat.com>
 
+	PR c++/48089
+	* semantics.c (potential_constant_expression_1): Change error about
+	use of *this in constructor into sorry.
+
 	PR c++/48296
 	* decl.c (cp_finish_decl): Defer validation of constexpr member
 	functions.

gcc/cp/semantics.c

@@ -7495,8 +7495,8 @@ potential_constant_expression_1 (tree t, bool want_rval, tsubst_flags_t flags)
 	    if (DECL_CONSTRUCTOR_P (DECL_CONTEXT (x)) && want_rval)
 	      {
 		if (flags & tf_error)
-		  error ("the value of the object being constructed is "
-			 "not a constant expression");
+		  sorry ("use of the value of the object being constructed "
+			 "in a constant expression");
 		return false;
 	      }
 	    return true;

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog

 2011-03-29  Jason Merrill  <jason@redhat.com>
 
+	* g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-48089.C: Adjust.
+
 	* g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-memfn1.C: New.
 
 	* g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-diag1.C: Adjust error locations.

gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-48089.C

 // PR c++/48089
 // { dg-options -std=c++0x }
 
+// bang is ill-formed (diagnostic required) because its initializer is
+// non-constant, because it uses the value of an uninitialized object.
+
+// s() is ill-formed (no diagnostic required) because there is no set of
+// arguments that would produce a constant expression.
+
+// R() is well-formed because i is initialized before j.
+
 struct s {
-    constexpr s() : v(v) { }	// { dg-error "object being constructed" }
-    char v;
+  constexpr s() : v(v) { }	// { dg-message "" }
+  int v;
+};
+
+constexpr s bang;		// { dg-error "" }
+
+struct R {
+  int i,j;
+  constexpr R() : i(42),j(i) { } // { dg-bogus "" "" { xfail *-*-* } }
 };
 
-s bang;
+constexpr R r;			// { dg-bogus "" "" { xfail *-*-* } }