***************
*** 346,358 ****
  
  sub detach { my $c = shift; $c->dispatcher->detach( $c, @_ ) }
  
  =head2 $c->go( $action [, \@arguments ] )
  
  =head2 $c->go( $class, $method, [, \@arguments ] )
  
- Almost the same as C<detach>, but does a full dispatch, instead of just
- calling the new C<$action> / C<$class-E<gt>$method>. This means that C<begin>,
- C<auto> and the method you go to is called, just like a new request.
  
  C<$c-E<gt>stash> is kept unchanged.
  
--- 346,378 ----
  
  sub detach { my $c = shift; $c->dispatcher->detach( $c, @_ ) }
  
+ =head2 $c->visit( $action [, \@arguments ] )
+ 
+ =head2 $c->visit( $class, $method, [, \@arguments ] )
+ 
+ Almost the same as C<forward>, but does a full dispatch, instead of just
+ calling the new C<$action> / C<$class-E<gt>$method>. This means that C<begin>,
+ C<auto> and the method you go to are called, just like a new request.
+ 
+ C<$c-E<gt>stash> is kept unchanged.
+ 
+ In effect, C<visit> allows you to "wrap" another action, just as it
+ would have been called by dispatching from a URL, while the analogous
+ C<go> allows you to transfer control to another action as if it had
+ been reached directly from a URL.
+ 
+ =cut
+ 
+ sub visit { my $c = shift; $c->dispatcher->visit( $c, @_ ) }
+ 
  =head2 $c->go( $action [, \@arguments ] )
  
  =head2 $c->go( $class, $method, [, \@arguments ] )
  
+ Almost the same as C<detach>, but does a full dispatch like C<visit>,
+ instead of just calling the new C<$action> /
+ C<$class-E<gt>$method>. This means that C<begin>, C<auto> and the
+ method you visit are called, just like a new request.
  
  C<$c-E<gt>stash> is kept unchanged.