Support for 32-bit CPUs

[Finagolfin]

@compnerd

Likewise - I'm simply suggesting that this might be an easier thing to accomplish and perhaps easier to run. That is, I'm simply pointing out an alternative approach which might hopefully be less time consuming on the CI runs (if it is more time consuming, we should not go down this path).

OK, I wasn't sure what you were getting at, since you didn't mention the CI in your prior comment.

It all depends on what kind of time we are trying to conserve. Android would be the easiest to configure, since we already have the 32-bit Android armv7 tests running. However, I'm guessing that adding running the 32-bit Windows x86 tests on every compiler pull would add the least CI runtime.

Adding running the 32-bit watchOS tests to every macOS smoke test on the PR CI would likely minimize both configuration and CI runtime, but for whatever reason that doesn't appear to be a public CI now.

@John_McCall

I don't think 32-bit Android is likely to end up as one of the mandatory CI platforms

This isn't about making 32-bit Android mandatory as much as making some 32-bit platform mandatory for compiler pulls, for which I'm suggesting Android armv7 as one possible candidate.

@John_McCall

so we'd still be waiting for other bots to run.

Not sure what you mean, you don't want to make pull authors wait longer? One advantage of adding Android is that it's a whole new separate CI job that completes much quicker than the others right now, so it would likely always finish first, at the expense of more CI minutes used than simply testing an incremental SDK like 32-bit watchOS.