https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=107079
--- Comment #6 from CVS Commits <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> --- The trunk branch has been updated by Marek Polacek <mpola...@gcc.gnu.org>: https://gcc.gnu.org/g:67b82bc1b29b82e4577df9491793624f3a8eb12f commit r13-5763-g67b82bc1b29b82e4577df9491793624f3a8eb12f Author: Marek Polacek <pola...@redhat.com> Date: Wed Feb 8 14:02:48 2023 -0500 c++: ICE initing lifetime-extended constexpr var [PR107079] We ICE on the simple: struct X { const X* x = this; }; constexpr const X& x = X{}; where store_init_value initializes 'x' with &TARGET_EXPR <D.2768, {.x=(const struct X *) &<PLACEHOLDER_EXPR struct X>}> but we must lifetime-extend via extend_ref_init_temps and we get _ZGR1x_.x = (const struct X *) &<PLACEHOLDER_EXPR struct X> >>>;, (const struct X &) &_ZGR1x_; Since 'x' was declared constexpr, we do cxx_constant_init and we hit the preeval code added in r269003 while evaluating the INIT_EXPR: _ZGR1x_.x = (const struct X *) &<PLACEHOLDER_EXPR struct X> >>> but we have no ctx.ctor or ctx.object here so lookup_placeholder won't find anything that could replace X and we ICE on 7861 /* A placeholder without a referent. We can get here when 7862 checking whether NSDMIs are noexcept, or in massage_init_elt; 7863 just say it's non-constant for now. */ 7864 gcc_assert (ctx->quiet); because cxx_constant_init means !ctx->quiet. It's not correct that there isn't a referent. I think the following patch is a pretty straightforward fix: pass the _ZGR var down to maybe_constant_init so that it can replace the PLACEHOLDER_EXPR with _ZGR1x_. The commented assert in the test doesn't pass: we complain that _ZGR1x_ isn't a constexpr variable because we don't implement DR2126 (PR101588). PR c++/107079 gcc/cp/ChangeLog: * call.cc (set_up_extended_ref_temp): Pass var to maybe_constant_init. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * g++.dg/cpp0x/constexpr-nsdmi2.C: New test.
