Point 1 needs to be addressed explicitly in the text of the RFC, not just in offhand remarks halfway down the thread.
I haven't seen point 2 addressed at all so far, can you point me at what you're thinking of?
Re bitfields, the problem is that this statement...
is fractally wrong. Furthermore, if you allow these arbitrary-bitwidth integers to be used as struct fields in any context where the resulting layout might be externally visible, without adding a whole bunch of other layout control features to the language at the same time, you're going to create unfixable bugs, and 20 years from now I'll be stuck telling people not to use Rust's bitfields, just like I have to tell people not to use C bitfields today.