Speaking to the practical side, I have written code that has to disentangle
itself from the failure of a complex startup sequence. I'd love to be able
to build a dynamic exit sequence. (In fact, being able to do <C>&block .=
{ more_stuff(); };</C> is way up on my list...)
I've wanted to do that sort of thing before, but it seems simpler (conceptually and practically) to build up an array of cleanup subs/blocks to execute in sequence, rather than to have a .= for blocks. (Another reason it's handy to keep them separate is in cases in which each needs to return some information--maybe a status which determines whether to proceed, etc.)
JEff
