Subject: bug#25111: (Inaccurate documentation of inhibit-modification-hooks)

From: Noam Postavsky <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2019 18:48:14 -0400

Alan Mackenzie <[email-masked]> writes:

> Hello, Eli and Noam (but mainly Noam).
>
> It's about time we finally got this matter tidied up, so...

Yeah, sorry I dropped the ball on this.

> I think the changes as now formulated are right.  Perhaps one or both of
> you might like to give the following patch a quick review.  Thanks!

Minor formatting nitpick:

> +++ b/doc/lispref/display.texi
> @@ -1752,9 +1752,12 @@ Overlay Properties

> +When these functions are called, @code{inhibit-modification-hooks} is
> +bound to non-@code{nil}.  If the functions modify the buffer, you
> +might want to bind @code{inhibit-modification-hooks} to nil, so as to
                                                           ^^^
> +cause the change hooks to run for these modifications.  However, doing
> +this may call your own change hook recursively, so be sure to prepare
> +for that.  @xref{Change Hooks}.

> +++ b/doc/lispref/text.texi

> @@ -3639,6 +3642,13 @@ Special Properties
>  beginning and end of the inserted text.  The functions are called
>  @emph{after} the actual insertion takes place.
>  
> +When these functions are called, @code{inhibit-modification-hooks} is
> +bound to non-@code{nil}.  If the functions modify the buffer, you
> +might want to bind @code{inhibit-modification-hooks} to nil, so as to
                                                           ^^^

@code{nil} for both of these, right?  Otherwise looks good to me.