aaron.ballman added a comment. In http://reviews.llvm.org/D20687#449312, @hintonda wrote:
> This marcher was recently added, and has never been in a release. > Specifically, it was added by me in support of a checker that has now been > abandoned in lieu of a better approach -- the new approach requires this > change -- so I doubt it would break anything. That's good to know, thanks! > That said, I will look into polymorphic matchers if that is the preferred > solution. Thank you -- I think that is still the right approach to take. We try to keep the matchers as close to the AST representation as possible, and this one (plus isNoThrow()) slipped through the cracks (in a useful way). http://reviews.llvm.org/D20687 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
