Subject: Re: bug#33601: 26; Add macro `with-hook-added'

From: Phil Sainty <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2018 11:37:42 +1300

On 2018-12-04 08:03, Drew Adams wrote:
> Maybe a better name would be `with-function-on-hook' or
> `with-hook-function-added'.  It is the function, not the
> hook, that is added (to the hook).

True, but `with-hook-added' seems consistent with the name of
`add-hook' itself (which likewise isn't for creating hooks).