bug#20241: 25.0.50; `setq' with only one argument

[Johan Bockgård]

John Wiegley <jwiegley@gmail.com> writes:

>>>>>> Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com> writes:
>
>> My preference for the compiler is to (a) let you know there are syntax
>> problems, and where they are, and (b) generate code that acts the same as
>> the interpreted code: in this case, raise a runtime error.
>
> Let's take a different case as a behavorial example:
>
>   The code: (funcall)
>
>   Interpreted: Raises an error: eval: Wrong number of arguments: funcall, 0
>
>   Byte-compilation: No warnings or errors printed.
>
>   Loading of .elc: Raises an error: load: Wrong number of arguments: funcall, > 0

(funcall) (print t)

Compile. Load .elc =>

This consistently gives me one of two results:
A segfault, or "Invalid function: 183795961" where the actual
number depends on the timestamp of the .elc file.