https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99125
--- Comment #4 from G. Steinmetz <gs...@t-online.de> --- > What was the reason for the (7:8) in the testcase? If this question was directed at me, some background : The problem occurred during verification tests, in other code constellation and with other numbers. (7:8) is simply beyond the array extension (1:2). The example in comment #0 was the result of some simplifications in order to get a very simple test case. I wondered about the ICE, and that it could be narrowed down to (well) a time range in the recent past. In the case of a regression, there must be a trigger for the change, and knowing this trigger can be quite helpful. It sometimes happens that there are gray zones where something "works" incorrectly with some numbers, or does not work with other numbers and remains undetected, or is detected with some combinations of options with again other numbers, or leads to an ICE with again other numbers. Cheers, Gerhard
