[antlr-interest] A throws clause on a grammar rule doesn't add a throws clause in the generated function

[Gavin Lambert]

At 14:50 13/08/2008, Ian Kaplan wrote:
>   I installed ANTLR 3.1 today in the hope that it would have a 
> fix for this problem.  However, that's not the case.  This seems 
> to be a simple thing to fix.  The "throws" clause is supported 
> by ANTLR, but it has not done anything for some time.  I don't 
> understand why this hasn't been fixed.  Or, if it's not going to 
> be fixed, why the "throws" is not just removed from the ANTLR 
> grammar grammar.

There's a few "placeholders" like that around at the moment -- 
stuff that's (presumably) intended to be implemented sometime 
later on.

Another one is the public/protected/private against a 
rule.  Doesn't do anything at present, but it's accepted.  (And it 
sometimes trips people up when porting from v2, since 'protected' 
meant something different there.)