diff --git a/Docs/editor-investigation.md b/Docs/editor-investigation.md
index fafde78..20b83ba 100644
--- a/Docs/editor-investigation.md
+++ b/Docs/editor-investigation.md
@@ -152,6 +152,55 @@ Conclusion: This may be necessary in the long term, but it should not be the fir
 
 The key finding is that Sapling can preserve a single source buffer and still present different active and inactive line states. This reduces risk compared with maintaining separate source and render buffers.
 
+## Finding #1 — Selection Feedback Loop
+
+Root cause:
+
+The first `NSTextView` bridge treated every selection notification as user intent, even when the selection change was caused by Sapling itself while restoring selection after an attribute pass.
+
+The recursive path was:
+
+```text
+textViewDidChangeSelection()
+-> selection binding update
+-> EditorState update
+-> @Published state refresh
+-> SwiftUI updateNSView()
+-> applyHybridAttributes()
+-> setSelectedRange()
+-> textViewDidChangeSelection()
+```
+
+This created an unbounded feedback loop and could crash immediately after launch while the hybrid styling pass and SwiftUI refresh cycle bounced selection updates back and forth.
+
+Architecture impact:
+
+- Selection is not just editor state; it is also a native text system side effect.
+- Attribute rendering can produce selection notifications even when the user's logical selection did not change.
+- SwiftUI refreshes must not be allowed to feed native programmatic changes back into `EditorState` as if they were user edits.
+- Hybrid editing remains viable, but the platform adapter must own reentrancy control.
+
+Chosen solution:
+
+- Programmatic text, selection, and attribute changes are wrapped in a coordinator transaction.
+- Selection delegate callbacks are ignored while that transaction is active.
+- `EditorCoordinator.updateSelection` and `updateSource` ignore no-op updates before publishing.
+- Attribute passes restore selection only if the text view actually changed it.
+- The bridge skips redundant restyling when both source text and active line are unchanged.
+
+This keeps the canonical source and selection model in `EditorState`, while making the native adapter responsible for distinguishing user-originated changes from TextKit side effects.
+
+Alternative solutions considered:
+
+- Temporary delegate removal: workable, but broader than needed and easy to forget when adding new native callbacks.
+- Debounced rendering: useful for future performance work, but it would only delay the recursion instead of fixing the feedback path.
+- Never restoring selection after attributes: avoids this crash, but risks cursor drift if TextKit changes selection during editing.
+- Moving selection outside published editor state: reduces SwiftUI refresh pressure, but weakens the architecture because active-line rendering depends on selection.
+
+Result:
+
+The app now survives launch, typing, arrow-key movement, and select-all smoke testing without re-entering the selection loop.
+
 ## AttributedString and NSAttributedString
 
 Swift `AttributedString` is useful for renderer-facing APIs and SwiftUI previews.
diff --git a/decisions.md b/decisions.md
index 423eba1..6ae932d 100644
--- a/decisions.md
+++ b/decisions.md
@@ -394,3 +394,4 @@ Negative:
 - AppKit and UIKit bridging adds platform-specific code.
 - The editor abstraction must prevent the rest of the app from depending directly on NSTextView or UITextView.
 - A future custom editor engine may still be required if line replacement or overlay rendering cannot preserve cursor correctness.
+- Native adapter updates must isolate user-originated selection changes from programmatic text, selection, and attribute changes to avoid SwiftUI/TextKit feedback loops.