"terminate is called" inconsistency

[jwakely]

Clause [except] consistently says "the function std::terminate is called".

[support.start.term] says "the function std::terminate shall be called" (which is an incorrect use of "shall", and redundant std-qualification).

[terminate.handler] says "The type of a handler function to be called by std::terminate() when terminating exception processing" (redundant qualification, completely bogus to use () when referring to a function by name, rather than describing a function call expression).

[execpol.seq], [execpol.par], [execpol.parunseq], and [execpol.unseq] say "terminate() shall be called" (incorrect "shall", unclear if it's trying to name the function or show a call expression, but arguably either is correct).

[stopsource] and [stopcallback.constr] (added by P0660R10, #3072) say "terminate() is called".

[thread.thread.constr] and [thread.jthread.constr] (the latter added by P0660R10 #3072) say "terminate shall be called" (incorrect "shall").

[thread.thread.destr] and [thread.thread.assign] say "calls terminate()".

[thread.condition.condvar] says "terminate() shall be called" many times (incorrect "shall").

This is a mess.

[jensmaurer]

See #2150.

[jensmaurer]

Editorial meeting: Use "call" for function call expressions; use "invoke" for abstract-machine-level discussion of control flow passing to another function. Also in [basic].
For this particular issue, "the function std::terminate is invoked" (no parens).

[languagelawyer]

Editorial meeting: Use "call" for function call expressions; use "invoke" for abstract-machine-level discussion of control flow passing to another function.

This resolves CWG2166

[jensmaurer]

@languagelawyer , CWG2166 has the title 'Unclear meaning of “undefined constexpr function” '. I fail to see a connection to call vs. invoke.

[languagelawyer]

@jensmaurer CWG2166 asks: undefined when? At the time of parsing ("call") or when really evaluated (invoked)? Are mutually-recursive constexpr functions allowed?

The resolution of editorial meeting answers: when really evaluated (invoked), the standard says «expr is a const. expr unless it would evaluate ... an invocation of an undefined constexpr function». Mutually-recursive constexpr functions are allowed, bc a function can be undefined when is called, but defined when invoked.