>>923909
Well, I don't know what to say other than that's wrong. Unless you're describing only undo and you've got your words mixed up.
With an undo/redo paradigm, it's very easy to accidentally prune entire redo paths by undoing actions and then making edits.
With only-undo, all your edits are recorded in the undo list, including undos themselves, so you redo by undoing again. This is why you will never lose any state your file was in with only-undo. The downside of this is that, in order to go back to a very far-off previous state, you have to enter more undos than you typically would, but, in Emacs at least, this is ammended by Emacs' numerical prefix and various other modules that you can use to query your undo path with fuzzy search and regexp and any other search method you can think of, probably.