> No, there is nothing to understand: the rule to minimize a variable's scope is mechanical. I tried to explain my answer to this in my third paragraph. > It'

> No, there is nothing to understand: the rule to minimize a variable's scope is mechanical. I tried to explain my answer to this in my third paragraph. > It's impossible to assume that even the very best programmer writes good code consistently, thus every possibility for failure must be automatized or mechanized. This is a strawman, if I thought the feature was useful to prevent this I would give it more consideration. I have already attempted to explain why I don't think conservative scoping aids bad/confusing variable re-use.