Federico Tedin <federicotedin@gmail.com> writes:

> Hi Michael,

Hi Federico,

> OK, I see that it is more useful in this case to have a list of
> functions that are called rather than a fixed list of strings. However I
> didn't understand your use of `run-hooks' - wouldn't this function call
> return nil in all cases? What would be an easy way of getting the
> results of calling all the hooks?

You're right, `run-hooks' was a stupid idea. I have adapted my proposal
and prepared a patch which works for me as expected. See appended.

Eli, would it be OK to push something like this to master?

> - Fede

Best regards, Michael.