================
@@ -78,23 +336,18 @@ public:
                       __split_buffer,
                       void>;
 
-  pointer __first_;
-  pointer __begin_;
-  pointer __end_;
-  _LIBCPP_COMPRESSED_PAIR(pointer, __cap_, allocator_type, __alloc_);
-
   __split_buffer(const __split_buffer&)            = delete;
   __split_buffer& operator=(const __split_buffer&) = delete;
 
-  _LIBCPP_CONSTEXPR_SINCE_CXX20 _LIBCPP_HIDE_FROM_ABI __split_buffer()
-      _NOEXCEPT_(is_nothrow_default_constructible<allocator_type>::value)
-      : __first_(nullptr), __begin_(nullptr), __end_(nullptr), __cap_(nullptr) 
{}
+  _LIBCPP_HIDE_FROM_ABI __split_buffer() = default;
 
   _LIBCPP_CONSTEXPR_SINCE_CXX20 _LIBCPP_HIDE_FROM_ABI explicit 
__split_buffer(__alloc_rr& __a)
-      : __first_(nullptr), __begin_(nullptr), __end_(nullptr), 
__cap_(nullptr), __alloc_(__a) {}
+      _NOEXCEPT_(is_nothrow_default_constructible<allocator_type>::value)
----------------
ldionne wrote:

Is there a reason for adding this conditional `noexcept` as part of this patch? 
Also below.

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/139632
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

Reply via email to