Thanks for the feedback. Updated patch is below.

The noexcept on definition and the declaration of constructors
_Sp_locker do not match.

ChangeLog
2016-12-05  Aditya Kumar  <hiradi...@msn.com>
        * src/c++11/shared_ptr.cc (_Sp_locker::_Sp_locker(const void* p)): Added
        noexcept on constructors.
        _Sp_locker::_Sp_locker(const void* p1, const void* p2): Same
---
 libstdc++-v3/src/c++11/shared_ptr.cc | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/src/c++11/shared_ptr.cc 
b/libstdc++-v3/src/c++11/shared_ptr.cc
index 9028040..b4addd0 100644
--- a/libstdc++-v3/src/c++11/shared_ptr.cc
+++ b/libstdc++-v3/src/c++11/shared_ptr.cc
@@ -56,7 +56,7 @@ _GLIBCXX_BEGIN_NAMESPACE_VERSION
     { return _Hash_impl::hash(addr) & __gnu_internal::mask; }
   }
 
-  _Sp_locker::_Sp_locker(const void* p)
+  _Sp_locker::_Sp_locker(const void* p) noexcept
   {
     if (__gthread_active_p())
       {
@@ -67,7 +67,7 @@ _GLIBCXX_BEGIN_NAMESPACE_VERSION
       _M_key1 = _M_key2 = __gnu_internal::invalid;
   }
 
-  _Sp_locker::_Sp_locker(const void* p1, const void* p2)
+  _Sp_locker::_Sp_locker(const void* p1, const void* p2) noexcept
   {
     if (__gthread_active_p())
       {
-- 
2.6.3

Reply via email to