[containers] "throws an exception"

[FrankHB]

Should subclauses in [containers] follow the resolution of LWG 1004?

Further, when do we really need "throws an exception" (if any)?

[jensmaurer]

@zygoloid, is this editorial given LWG 1004?

[jwakely]

It might be better to just add blanket wording to say that when we say a library function throws an exception we are talking about some part of the function throwing or propagating one, and the function not swallowing it.

[jensmaurer]

@jwakely, why? If we agree that we mean "exits via an exception", we should use these words throughout instead of using other words that might say something we don't mean.

[jwakely]

OK, it's just more work to do that, and personally I don't see a large benefit. But some other people in LWG do get upset by the inaccuracy of the current wording.

[jensmaurer]

Editorial teleconference: Go with "exits via an exception" wherever we say "throws an exception" and we mean the former.

[jensmaurer]

It's not obvious how to concisely phrase "Throws: Any exception thrown by <blah>."

(Branch c25.)

[jensmaurer]

Editorial teleconference: Just fix the simple cases and punt the rest to LWG.