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

[Stefan Monnier]

>> Somebody wanting to use b-c-f and reading that text is likely to conclude
>> that b-c-f is called for _every_ change, just as I did ~10 years ago.
> Then they will be wrong, because the text doesn't say so.

I think we're talking about different notions of "every change".
More specifically, I think I don't understand what Alan thinks "every
change" means, and I suspect that he doesn't understand what I mean by
that either.


        Stefan