------- Comment #5 from tkoenig at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-07 17:52 ------- Hi FX,
> do you remember why always performing that check (ie, turn function to be > always true) is not the right thing to do? When working on this, I hit numerous testsuite regressions when always checking for negative extents, and I couldn't find out why. So I only fixed the code path for the particular PR. If you find something that works without that argument (which is a bit of a kudge), so much the better. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30720
