[PATCH] D59650: [NFC] ExceptionEscapeCheck: small refactoring

[Dmitri Gribenko via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

gribozavr accepted this revision.
gribozavr marked an inline comment as done.
gribozavr added inline comments.
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.


================
Comment at: clang-tidy/utils/ExceptionAnalyzer.cpp:226
+ExceptionAnalyzer::ExceptionInfo
+ExceptionAnalyzer::analyzeBoilerplate(const T *Node) {
+  ExceptionInfo ExceptionList;
----------------
lebedev.ri wrote:
> gribozavr wrote:
> > JonasToth wrote:
> > > lebedev.ri wrote:
> > > > Please bikeshed on the name. I don't think this one is good.
> > > Hmm, `analyzeGeneric`, `analyzeGeneral`, `abstractAnalysis`, `analyzeAbstract`, something good in these?
> > > 
> > > Given its private its not too important either ;)
> > I'd suggest to simplify by changing `analyzeBoilerplate()` into a non-template, into this specifically:
> > 
> > ```
> > ExceptionAnalyzer::ExceptionInfo ExceptionAnalyzer::filterIgnoredExceptions(ExceptionInfo ExceptionList) {
> >     if (ExceptionList.getBehaviour() == State::NotThrowing ||
> >       ExceptionList.getBehaviour() == State::Unknown)
> >     return ExceptionList;
> > 
> >   // Remove all ignored exceptions from the list of exceptions that can be
> >   // thrown.
> >   ExceptionList.filterIgnoredExceptions(IgnoredExceptions, IgnoreBadAlloc);
> > 
> >   return ExceptionList;
> > }
> > ```
> > 
> > And then call it in `analyze()`:
> > 
> > ```
> > ExceptionAnalyzer::ExceptionInfo
> > ExceptionAnalyzer::analyze(const FunctionDecl *Func) {
> >   return filterIgnoredExceptions(analyzeImpl(Func));
> > }
> > ```
> Hmm not really.
> I intentionally did all this to maximally complicate any possibility of accidentally doing
> something different given diferent entry point (`Stmt` vs `FunctionDecl`).
> Refactoring it that way, via `filterIgnoredExceptions()` increases that risk back.
> (accidentally omit that intermediate function, and ...)
> (accidentally omit that intermediate function, and ...)

... and tests should catch it.  No big drama.

Anyway, it is not as important.  I do think however that complicating the code this way is not worth the benefit.


Repository:
  rCTE Clang Tools Extra

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D59650/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D59650