Re: Unbalanced change hooks (part 2) [Documentation fix still remaining]

[Stefan Monnier]

>> I guess a way to "fix" it would be to add a random fudge factor to the
>> b-c-f calls, plus add random dummy calls to b-c-f, and sprinkle the
>> lisp/*.el code with combine-after-change-calls.  This way, the "properly
>> paired up" case will be much more exceptional.
> You can't be serious.

If it can finally get us rid of people who insist they want exactly
paired/matched/symmetric b/a-c-f, then I'd willing to do that, yes.

AFAICT the result would be simpler, cleaner, and more robust code, since
instead of trying to think of the various different ways a buffer can
change here or there, the coder would be forced to step back and think
how to handle the general case.


        Stefan