[PATCH] Supporting function-try-blocks for -Wreturn-type

[David Blaikie]

Is a CompoundStatement's start/end loc ever different from lbrace/rbrace
location? (maybe when it's a compound statement without braces? But that
can never occur in this part of the AST, right) If it isn't, then the
if/else LBrace/RBrace bit could be omitted. Maybe then we could just remove
the "if CompoundStatement" bit entirely? (or check that it's not a
defaulted definition, etc? Not sure what else might appear here in the AST)

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 1:37 PM, Aaron Ballman <aaron at aaronballman.com>
wrote:

> Details, details! ;-) It was trivial, but not THAT trivial -- thanks,
> David!
>
> ~Aaron
>
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 4:34 PM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:
> > (missing patch attachment)
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 1:29 PM, Aaron Ballman <aaron at aaronballman.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Currently, function try blocks are not analyzed to determine whether
> >> all control paths return a value. This patch addresses that, and adds
> >> test cases for it. This appears to be a relatively simple change
> >> required to support this.
> >>
> >> ~Aaron
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> cfe-commits mailing list
> >> cfe-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
> >> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
> >
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20141022/e00e80a7/attachment.html>