> I don't see what the stor-layout.c changes have to do with that
> description, or why they are correct (they look wrong to me; the
> existing addition of BITS_PER_UNIT_LOG + 1 looks logically correct
> for bitsizetype).

sooo... the type for bitsizetype will *always* be a bigger type than
sizetype?  Even when sizetype is already the largest type the target
can handle naturally?

Reply via email to