Repository navigation
[unord.hash] Redundant wording LWG 3512 #4437
Description
Activity
I agree those words are redundant, but is that wording even true? If the hash function is
hash<optional<T>>then it's not a program-defined specialization, but it can throw ifhash<T>can throw.Rather than fixing the redundancy as an editorial issue, we need to fix the falsehood as an LWG issue.
You're right. Fortunately, the redundant part comes after the falsehood part.
- changed the title
[-][unord.hash] Redundant wording[/-][+][unord.hash] Redundant wording LWG 3512[/+]on Jan 21, 2021
[unord.hash]p5.4 ends with "shall not throw an exception unless
hash<Key>is a program-defined specialization that depends on at least one program-defined type.""that depends on at least one program-defined type" is redundant given [namespace.std]p2: "Unless explicitly prohibited, a program may add a template specialization for any standard library class template to namespace std provided that (a) the added declaration depends on at least one program-defined type ..."