-;;; The DEFINE-STORAGE-CLASS call for CATCH-BLOCK refers to the size of
-;;; CATCH-BLOCK. The size of CATCH-BLOCK isn't calculated until later in
-;;; the build process, and the calculation is entangled with code which has
-;;; lots of predependencies, including dependencies on the prior call of
-;;; DEFINE-STORAGE-CLASS. The proper way to unscramble this would be to
-;;; untangle the code, so that the code which calculates the size of
-;;; CATCH-BLOCK can be separated from the other lots-of-dependencies code, so
-;;; that the code which calculates the size of CATCH-BLOCK can be executed
-;;; early, so that this value is known properly at this point in compilation.
-;;; However, that would be a lot of editing of code that I (WHN 19990131) can't
-;;; test until the project is complete. So instead, I set the correct value by
-;;; hand here (a sort of nondeterministic guess of the right answer:-) and add
-;;; an assertion later, after the value is calculated, that the original guess
-;;; was correct.
+;;; The DEFINE-STORAGE-CLASS call for CATCH-BLOCK refers to the size
+;;; of CATCH-BLOCK. The size of CATCH-BLOCK isn't calculated until
+;;; later in the build process, and the calculation is entangled with
+;;; code which has lots of predependencies, including dependencies on
+;;; the prior call of DEFINE-STORAGE-CLASS. The proper way to
+;;; unscramble this would be to untangle the code, so that the code
+;;; which calculates the size of CATCH-BLOCK can be separated from the
+;;; other lots-of-dependencies code, so that the code which calculates
+;;; the size of CATCH-BLOCK can be executed early, so that this value
+;;; is known properly at this point in compilation. However, that
+;;; would be a lot of editing of code that I (WHN 19990131) can't test
+;;; until the project is complete. So instead, I set the correct value
+;;; by hand here (a sort of nondeterministic guess of the right
+;;; answer:-) and add an assertion later, after the value is
+;;; calculated, that the original guess was correct.