A7-1-2: Refactor test case to reflect rule intention

Change the test case related to constexpr functions to highlight
expected behaviour for local variables.

Author: lcartey

cpp/autosar/test/rules/A7-1-2/VariableMissingConstexpr.expected

@@ -8,6 +8,8 @@
 | test.cpp:44:16:44:17 | lc | Variable 'lc' could be marked 'constexpr'. |
 | test.cpp:45:17:45:19 | lc2 | Variable 'lc2' could be marked 'constexpr'. |
 | test.cpp:55:7:55:8 | m2 | Variable 'm2' could be marked 'constexpr' and static. |
+| test.cpp:65:7:65:8 | x2 | Variable 'x2' could be marked 'constexpr'. |
+| test.cpp:66:13:66:14 | x3 | Variable 'x3' could be marked 'constexpr'. |
 | test.cpp:130:7:130:8 | m1 | Variable 'm1' could be marked 'constexpr' and static. |
 | test.cpp:141:7:141:8 | m1 | Variable 'm1' could be marked 'constexpr' and static. |
 | test.cpp:221:7:221:8 | l1 | Variable 'l1' could be marked 'constexpr'. |

cpp/autosar/test/rules/A7-1-2/test.cpp

@@ -56,16 +56,16 @@ class MemberConstExpr {
   int m3 = 0; // COMPLIANT - can be set by constructor
 };
 
-int h1(int x, int y) { // NON_COMPLIANT
-  return x + y;
-}
+int h1(int x, int y) { return x + y; }
 
-constexpr int h1_correct(int x, int y) { // COMPLIANT
-  return x + y;
-}
+constexpr int h1_const(int x, int y) { return x + y; }
 
-int h2(int x) { return h1(x, 1) + 1; } // NON_COMPLIANT
-constexpr int h2_correct(int x) { return h1_correct(x, 1) + 1; } // COMPLIANT
+int h2() {
+  int x1 = h1(1, 1);                 // COMPLIANT
+  int x2 = h1_const(1, 1);           // NON_COMPLIANT
+  const int x3 = h1_const(1, 1);     // NON_COMPLIANT
+  constexpr int x4 = h1_const(1, 1); // COMPLIANT
+}
 
 int h3(int x) { // COMPLIANT - uses goto, so can't be constexpr
   if (x) {