switch-to-buffer of file that changed on disk: don't ask, don't tell

[Dan Jacobson]

When one does switch-to-buffer of a file that has changed on disk, no
warning is given.  One is only warned when one attempts to make
changes.  This could still result in someone spending several hours
reading an old irrelevant copy of something, nobody alerting them that
there was a new version on the disk.  Consider read only files.  What
alert mechanism is in place to tell the reader to stop reading
old versions once they become old on disk?

Not that it is a problem usually.  Just trying to sound dramatic.
Yes, I know that less(1), more(1) etc. don't alert one either, and
probably shouldn't or else they would become bloated.
-- 
http://www.geocities.com/jidanni/ Taiwan(04)25854780