Jakub was right that we were failing to add indices to the array
CONSTRUCTOR along this code path. It seems appropriate to add them
earlier, in reshape_init, like we do for classes, so this patch fixes
the bug that way.
Tested x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, applying to trunk. Also OK for 4.6.0? The
risk is that something else not caught by the testsuite could be
confused by adding the indices slightly sooner, but that seems unlikely.
commit 4d360926bf71c078e6c6962b7aee997c2e5974e6
Author: Jason Merrill <ja...@redhat.com>
Date: Wed Mar 16 15:15:56 2011 -0400
PR c++/48132
* decl.c (check_array_designated_initializer): Allow integer index.
(reshape_init_array_1): Set index on the elements.
diff --git a/gcc/cp/decl.c b/gcc/cp/decl.c
index f9d90ad..3139ad8 100644
--- a/gcc/cp/decl.c
+++ b/gcc/cp/decl.c
@@ -4596,6 +4596,9 @@ check_array_designated_initializer (const constructor_elt
*ce)
if (ce->index == error_mark_node)
error ("name used in a GNU-style designated "
"initializer for an array");
+ else if (TREE_CODE (ce->index) == INTEGER_CST)
+ /* An index added by reshape_init. */
+ return true;
else
{
gcc_assert (TREE_CODE (ce->index) == IDENTIFIER_NODE);
@@ -4899,7 +4902,8 @@ reshape_init_array_1 (tree elt_type, tree max_index,
reshape_iter *d)
elt_init = reshape_init_r (elt_type, d, /*first_initializer_p=*/false);
if (elt_init == error_mark_node)
return error_mark_node;
- CONSTRUCTOR_APPEND_ELT (CONSTRUCTOR_ELTS (new_init), NULL_TREE,
elt_init);
+ CONSTRUCTOR_APPEND_ELT (CONSTRUCTOR_ELTS (new_init),
+ size_int (index), elt_init);
}
return new_init;
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-array3.C
b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-array3.C
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..145a430
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-array3.C
@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
+// PR c++/48132
+// { dg-options -std=c++0x }
+
+struct C
+{
+ constexpr C (int x) : c (x) {}
+ int c;
+};
+
+void
+foo ()
+{
+ C a[] = { C (0) };
+}
