aaron.ballman added a comment. In http://reviews.llvm.org/D20052#430903, @hintonda wrote:
> Great, unless() was what I was missing. I'll refactor along those lines. > > As for what I'm trying to achieve, I want a set containing "throw()" and > another set containing "throw(something)". If there's a cleaner way to > achieve that with an existing matcher, please let me know. `allOf(hasDynamicExceptionSpecification(), isNoThrow())` gets you "throw()" and `allOf(hasDynamicExceptionSpecification(), unless(isNoThrow())` gets you "throw(something)", doesn't it? http://reviews.llvm.org/D20052 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
