https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=70078
--- Comment #1 from Dominik Vogt <vogt at linux dot vnet.ibm.com> --- Hijacking this bug report for more unclear documentation in that section; proposed changes in marked with <...>. Apart from the bad grammar, the meaning of this sentence is a mystery: Splitting of jump instruction into sequence that over by another jump instruction is always valid, as compiler expect identical behavior of new jump. => Splitting of jump instruction<s> into <a> sequence that <??????> another jump instruction is always valid, as <the> compiler expect<s> <???what???>. Anybody able to fill in the gaps?
