Another difference between books and code is that books are read and interpreted by humans (who are very tolerant of grammar bad, in the grand scheme of things) and code is read and interpreted by computers (who will swallow any ambiguity whole and just steam on with their interpretation.)

If books were read by machines rather than humans, and were published incrementally, then it would make sense to ask someone to edit each iteration.

> Books are published once, not through iterations.

Incorrect. Bugs (“errata”) are regularly fixed in bugfix versions (“printings”) of books, whereas feature changes are regularly fixed in more major versions (“editions”). And that’s after the equivalent of a “1.0” release.

Books are also regularly iteratively released either to a closed group of reviewers or even the public (e.g., Manning MEAPs, PragProg Beta Books, etc.) prior to the equivalent of a “1.0” release.

> Bugs (“errata”) are regularly fixed in bugfix versions (“printings”) of books,

But those fixes don't fix the already printed books.

> But those fixes don't fix the already printed books.

For actual physical books (as opposed to ebooks, where making the complete new version available to purchasers for errata, but usually not new editions, is common), this is usually true for logistical reasons, though issuing errata sheets (usually online now, though the practice is older but notification and distribution was harder in the past) to keep existing users up-to-date is not uncommon.