Re: [PATCH] blame: prevent a segv when -L given start > EOF

On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 11:00 PM, Jay Soffian [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

so checking with bottom alone should suffice, no?

Ah true. You can squash that in? :-)

Actually, no, that doesn't work, but my head can't keep bottom=start,
top=end straight so I'm not even sure why not.

j.