- :lowtag fun-pointer-lowtag
- :widetag simple-fun-header-widetag)
- #!-x86 (self :ref-trans %simple-fun-self
- :set-trans (setf %simple-fun-self))
- #!+x86 (self
- ;; KLUDGE: There's no :SET-KNOWN, :SET-TRANS, :REF-KNOWN, or
- ;; :REF-TRANS here in this case. Instead, there's separate
- ;; DEFKNOWN/DEFINE-VOP/DEFTRANSFORM stuff in
- ;; compiler/x86/system.lisp to define and declare them by
- ;; hand. I don't know why this is, but that's (basically)
- ;; the way it was done in CMU CL, and it works. (It's not
- ;; exactly the same way it was done in CMU CL in that CMU
- ;; CL's allows duplicate DEFKNOWNs, blithely overwriting any
- ;; previous data associated with the previous DEFKNOWN, and
- ;; that property was used to mask the definitions here. In
- ;; SBCL as of 0.6.12.64 that's not allowed -- too confusing!
- ;; -- so we have to explicitly suppress the DEFKNOWNish
- ;; stuff here in order to allow this old hack to work in the
- ;; new world. -- WHN 2001-08-82
- )
+ :lowtag fun-pointer-lowtag
+ :widetag simple-fun-header-widetag)
+ #!-(or x86 x86-64) (self :ref-trans %simple-fun-self
+ :set-trans (setf %simple-fun-self))
+ #!+(or x86 x86-64) (self
+ ;; KLUDGE: There's no :SET-KNOWN, :SET-TRANS, :REF-KNOWN, or
+ ;; :REF-TRANS here in this case. Instead, there's separate
+ ;; DEFKNOWN/DEFINE-VOP/DEFTRANSFORM stuff in
+ ;; compiler/x86/system.lisp to define and declare them by
+ ;; hand. I don't know why this is, but that's (basically)
+ ;; the way it was done in CMU CL, and it works. (It's not
+ ;; exactly the same way it was done in CMU CL in that CMU
+ ;; CL's allows duplicate DEFKNOWNs, blithely overwriting any
+ ;; previous data associated with the previous DEFKNOWN, and
+ ;; that property was used to mask the definitions here. In
+ ;; SBCL as of 0.6.12.64 that's not allowed -- too confusing!
+ ;; -- so we have to explicitly suppress the DEFKNOWNish
+ ;; stuff here in order to allow this old hack to work in the
+ ;; new world. -- WHN 2001-08-82
+ )