rnk added a comment. Re: clang-tidy, I would rather implement this as a traditional compiler warning.
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D33333#761208, @aaron.ballman wrote: > In https://reviews.llvm.org/D33333#761126, @jyu2 wrote: > > > As I said, I don't think checking throw type matching catch handler type is > > compiler's job. I'd like either silence all warning for that. What do you > > think? > > > Consider the following cases: > ... > I think the expected behavior in these cases is reasonable (and can be done > with a CFG) rather than manually looking at the scope stack like you're doing. I agree with @jyu2, we should do something simple. I think it would be simple to handle all cases except for `h`, which requires semantic analysis to figure out if the thrown object would be caught by the catch parameter. Implementing that is more likely to introduce bugs in the compiler than it is to find bugs in user code. I doubt we need the CFG for any of this. The later examples are all throwing exceptions from catch blocks, which is the same as not having an open try scope. https://reviews.llvm.org/D33333 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
