Thanks to K-ballo for noting a second incorrect noexcept clause in tuple - and suggesting a more correct way to write the first
llvm-svn: 217884
Cr-Mirrored-From: sso://chromium.googlesource.com/_direct/external/github.com/llvm/llvm-project
Cr-Mirrored-Commit: 10a65e2ee15499afa1df9717fe0031529b5e556e
diff --git a/include/tuple b/include/tuple
index 8ccec56..1463170 100644
--- a/include/tuple
+++ b/include/tuple
@@ -554,12 +554,12 @@
_LIBCPP_INLINE_VISIBILITY _LIBCPP_CONSTEXPR_AFTER_CXX11
tuple(_Up&&... __u)
_NOEXCEPT_((
- is_nothrow_constructible<base(
+ is_nothrow_constructible<base,
typename __make_tuple_indices<sizeof...(_Up)>::type,
typename __make_tuple_types<tuple, sizeof...(_Up)>::type,
typename __make_tuple_indices<sizeof...(_Tp), sizeof...(_Up)>::type,
typename __make_tuple_types<tuple, sizeof...(_Tp), sizeof...(_Up)>::type,
- _Up...)
+ _Up...
>::value
))
: base_(typename __make_tuple_indices<sizeof...(_Up)>::type(),
@@ -595,7 +595,7 @@
explicit
tuple(_Up&&... __u)
_NOEXCEPT_((
- is_nothrow_constructible<
+ is_nothrow_constructible<base,
typename __make_tuple_indices<sizeof...(_Up)>::type,
typename __make_tuple_types<tuple, sizeof...(_Up)>::type,
typename __make_tuple_indices<sizeof...(_Tp), sizeof...(_Up)>::type,