> From: Philipp Stephani <p.stephani2@gmail.com>
> Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 16:40:23 +0000
> Cc: aurelien.aptel+emacs@gmail.com, tzz@lifelogs.com, dancol@dancol.org
>
>     I believe the line with "<subr module-call>" is suboptimal, in that it
>     looks alien and includes all kinds of unneeded and weirdly formatted
>     data. AFAIU, the reason is that we deliberately unintern module-call.
>     Should we perhaps reconsider that decision, so that the backtrace is
>     in more familiar form? What exactly are the dangers of having
>     module-call exposed as any other primitive?
>
>
> - Somebody calls it with the wrong type. Right now it doesn't do any type
> checking, so that would crash/be UB.

We can add checks to countermand that.

> - An existing function outside of Emacs might already be called like that.

Not really a problem, IMO.