mclow.lists added inline comments. ================ Comment at: include/__config:847 @@ +846,3 @@ +} +#define _LIBCPP_THROW(E, MSG) __libcxx_noexceptions_report(MSG) +#else // !_LIBCPP_NO_EXCEPTIONS ---------------- I don't care for having to specify something twice. (E, MSG). Maybe "stringify" E and make that the message.
================ Comment at: test/support/noexcept.h:23 @@ +22,3 @@ +// tests use multiple catch statements, in those cases we have to use the +// _LIBCPP_NO_EXCEPTIONS macro and exclude the additional catch statements. +#ifndef _LIBCPP_NO_EXCEPTIONS ---------------- I don't care for this; I think that "implementing a mechanism for throwing exceptions in the test suite for when we've disabled exceptions" seems like something that we'll have to revisit time and time again. I wonder if it would be better to just split some tests into multiple tests (some parts that test exception handling, some that don't), and then XFAIL: no-exceptions the ones that test exception handling. http://reviews.llvm.org/D14653 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
