Re: static variables with function scope

Sorry if I play the "spoilsport", but do we really need this feature at all? We can always store global values in global variables. As I see it, the number of uses are reasonably few.

The same could be said for C, but there the use of include files leads to potential name-collisions at the top-level.

The main potential use I see in Pike, is where static storage is needed for some macro, but this could be solved by splitting out the storage declaration into a separate macro.

Bernd

Anyway, the consensus seems to be "Why?", and I more or less agree. The reason I implemented it was that it was on an old wishlist, and it was reasonably simple to implement.

I've now reverted the change.