mattd marked an inline comment as done.
mattd added inline comments.
================
Comment at: lib/Sema/SemaDecl.cpp:10266
auto *FPT = NewFD->getType()->castAs<FunctionProtoType>();
- bool AnyNoexcept = HasNoexcept(FPT->getReturnType());
- for (QualType T : FPT->param_types())
- AnyNoexcept |= HasNoexcept(T);
- if (AnyNoexcept)
+ if (hasNoexcept(FPT->getReturnType()) ||
+ llvm::any_of(FPT->param_types(),
----------------
Rakete1111 wrote:
> What you're doing here is a subset of what `hasNoexcept` is doing for
> function types. Do you think it would make sense to use `!FPT->isNothrow() &&
> hasNoexcept(NewFW->getType())` or something like that?
Thanks for the comments @Rakete1111.
I do see the similarity and was trying to implement a solution to take
advantage of that. However, I was running into trouble on assert/debug builds.
`llvm_unreachable`, called in `FunctionProtoType::canThrow`, will trigger on
FunctionProtoType instances that have not yet had their exception-spec type
evaluated. `canThrow` is called on behalf of `isNothrow`. Some of the test
cases will fail in assert/debug builds if we place a call to to
`FPT->isNothrow` here.
The original code avoided this assertion by not calling `isNothrow` on FPT
here, but instead just evaluating the return and parameter types of FPT. I
made this patch similar to what was already in place, but with the more
thorough check in `hasNoexcept.` I'd be pleased to remove this
duplication/similarity if I can avoid this assertion.
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D55039/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D55039
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
