--- Comment #17 from sudi at gcc dot ---
Since this looks like a pretty invasive problem, according to my discussions
with Wilco and Kyrill, I think I will try to propose a smaller, but temporary
fix using the ?s and special casing 32 for this PR (which could go in sooner).
I will also open a new PR to handle this at the expand phase and clean up the
code aimed at gcc 9.

Reply via email to