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

[Daniel Colascione]

On 08/29/2016 06:00 AM, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> Furthermore, the cases I've seen of code designs which wants this
> behavior tend to be brittle and overly complicated, compared to
> alternative designs which don't rely on this behavior.
>
> 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.