On 03/04/2015 03:02 PM, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>> Why should that be a bug?
> 
> Because the body is missing.
> Don't know, maybe it's just me.  I admit having seen things like
> 
>    (defun foo ())
> 
> but it always looked like a horrible abuse to me, rather than something
> I'd like to actively support.

It does work, though. It's analogous to (progn), (and), and (or), which
evolve to nil, nil, and t, respectively. Common Lisp also works fine
with empty function bodies. We shouldn't make empty functions work
everywhere except this one context.