aaron.ballman added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D33537#765445, @baloghadamsoftware wrote:
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D33537#764834, @Prazek wrote: > > > How is that compared to https://reviews.llvm.org/D19201 and the clang patch > > mentioned in this patch? > > > Actually, this check does much more. It does not only check for noexcept (and > throw()) functions, but also for destructors, move constructors, move > assignments, the main() function, swap() functions and also functions given > as option. A more important difference is that we traverse the whole > call-chain and check all the throw statements and try-catch blocks so > indirectly throwing functions are also reported and no flase positives are > caused by throw and catch in the same try block. I think we should try to get as much of this functionality in https://reviews.llvm.org/D33333 as possible; there is a considerable amount of overlap between that functionality and this functionality. This check can then cover only the parts that are not reasonably handled by the frontend check instead of duplicating diagnostics the user already receives. https://reviews.llvm.org/D33537 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
