Subject: Re: bug#13949: 24.4.1; `fill-paragraph' should not always put the buffer as modified

From: Michael Heerdegen <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2016 18:56:00 +0100

Jaakov <[email-masked]> writes:

> Objection for the following reason:
> - It's a human who types in and deletes a charter.
> - fill-paragraph is not a human, but a routine.

I agree.  Executing one command that has the effect of (1) not changing
the buffer and (2) marking the buffer modified makes no sense to the
user.  It makes sense from the viewpoint of the code, but not from the
viewpoint of the user interface.  It is confusing to the user, that's
not good, so if we could change it, it would be progress, no matter how
this issue is classified in technical terms.

Michael.