Gavin Sinclair wrote:

> [...]
>
>>I think Matz wants a compulsory warning if you shadow a variable in this way
>>(i.e. generated even if you don't specify '-w')
>>    
>>
>
>
>Please justify why this warning is necessary.  The code you give above
>is elegant.  The proposed rules make it clear what is meant, and it
>satisfies my POLS.  Why is a warning generated?
>
>  
>

Essentially, the warning ends up saying: The scoping rules are improved 
now, but everybody must pretend they are not.

The fix is one I've hoped for for a long time, exactly because I don't 
want to worry over the naming of parameters. But in the end, compulsive 
warnings defeat that purpose.

Block parameters fill the role of natural language's common pronouns, 
not its proper nouns. Please make the warnings optional so we can use 
them that way.

  Mark