-The CMU CL version of this compiler reportedly produces pretty good
-code for modern CPU architectures which have lots of registers, but
-its code for the X86 is marred by a lot of extra loads and stores to
-stack-based temporary variables. Because of this, and because of the
-extra levels of indirection in Common Lisp relative to C, the
-performance of SBCL isn't going to impress people who are impressed by
-small constant factors. However, even on the X86 it tends to be faster
-than byte interpreted languages (and can be a lot faster).
+The compiler reportedly produces pretty good code for modern CPU
+architectures which have lots of registers, but its code for the X86
+is marred by many extra loads and stores to stack-based temporary
+variables. Because of this, and because of the extra levels of
+indirection in Common Lisp relative to C, the performance of SBCL
+isn't going to impress people who are impressed by small constant
+factors. However, even on the X86 it tends to be faster than byte
+interpreted languages (and can be a lot faster).