Re: Benchmarking temporary Lisp objects [Was: Re: [RFC] temporary Lisp_Strings]

[Stefan Monnier]

> Correct.  We'd need (1) e.g. to build up a list in a loop, and have the list
> survive until function exit.  But on further thought this is
> probably a dangerous feature, since it'll be too tempting to write unbounded
> loops.  So let's not do (1).

Is (2) actually valid?  I mean, are we allowed to refer (via
a reference) to a variable that's in a block we already exited?


        Stefan