[PATCH] Introduce abi_word_mode

[Richard Kenner]

> I agree.  I think that it's unfortunate that GCC didn't clearly document 
> this limitation (perhaps because nobody thought of it); it shows once 
> again how we can get burned by adding source extensions.  But, to me, it 
> really does seem the lesser of two evils to preserve the current meaning 
> (or to remove the feature entirely) rather than to change its meaning.

Why would you want to remove it?  I don't think there's any other way at the
source level of stating you want a type whose width is BITS_PER_WORD and
that's a valuable thing to have for portability reasons.