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,