(def!constant float-overflow-trap-bit (ash 1 2)) ; ro
(def!constant float-divide-by-zero-trap-bit (ash 1 1)) ; ro
(def!constant float-invalid-trap-bit (ash 1 0)) ; ro
-(defconstant-eqx float-traps-byte (byte 6 1) #'equalp)
+(defconstant-eqx float-traps-byte (byte 6 1) #'equalp)
;;; exceptions are also read/written in software (by syscalls, no less).
;;; This is kind of dumb, but has to be done
-(defconstant-eqx float-sticky-bits (byte 6 17) #'equalp) ; fp_control
+(defconstant-eqx float-sticky-bits (byte 6 17) #'equalp) ; fp_control
;;; (We don't actually _have_ "current exceptions" on Alpha; the
;;; hardware only ever sets bits. So, set this the same as accrued
(def!constant float-round-to-negative 1)
(def!constant float-round-to-nearest 2)
(def!constant float-round-to-positive 3)
-(defconstant-eqx float-rounding-mode (byte 2 58) #'equalp)
+(defconstant-eqx float-rounding-mode (byte 2 58) #'equalp)
;;; Miscellaneous stuff - I think it's far to say that you deserve
;;; what you get if you ask for fast mode.
sb!kernel:two-arg->
sb!kernel:two-arg-=
;; FIXME: Is this
- ;; probably need the following as they are defined in
- ;; arith.lisp: two-arg-<= two-arg->= two-arg-/=
+ ;; probably need the following as they are defined in
+ ;; arith.lisp: two-arg-<= two-arg->= two-arg-/=
;; a comment from old CMU CL or old old CMU CL or
;; the SBCL alpha port or what? Do we need to worry about it,
;; or can we delete it?