-(define-good-modular-fun logand :unsigned)
-(define-good-modular-fun logior :unsigned)
-;;; FIXME: XOR? ANDC1, ANDC2? -- CSR, 2003-09-16
+;;;
+;;; FIXME: I think that the :GOODness of a modular function boils down
+;;; to whether the normal definition can be used in the middle of a
+;;; modular arrangement. LOGAND and LOGIOR can be for all unsigned
+;;; modular implementations, I believe, because for all unsigned
+;;; arguments of a given size the result of the ordinary definition is
+;;; the right one. This should follow through to other logical
+;;; functions, such as LOGXOR, should it not? -- CSR, 2007-12-29,
+;;; trying to understand a comment he wrote over four years
+;;; previously: "FIXME: XOR? ANDC1, ANDC2? -- CSR, 2003-09-16"
+(define-good-modular-fun logand :untagged nil)
+(define-good-modular-fun logior :untagged nil)
+(define-good-modular-fun logxor :untagged nil)
+(macrolet ((define-good-signed-modular-funs (&rest funs)
+ (let (result)
+ `(progn
+ ,@(dolist (fun funs (nreverse result))
+ (push `(define-good-modular-fun ,fun :untagged t) result)
+ (push `(define-good-modular-fun ,fun :tagged t) result))))))
+ (define-good-signed-modular-funs
+ logand logandc1 logandc2 logeqv logior lognand lognor lognot
+ logorc1 logorc2 logxor))