OpenEuphoria

I'm lost in this thread, what exactly are you speaking of that was added that does not provide any benefit? Are you speaking of:

sequence names = { "John Doe", "Jim Doe", "Jack Doe", "Joe Doe" } 
 
for i = 1 to length(names) do 
    sequence name = names[i] 
    sequence firstName = get_first_name(name) 
    sequence lastName = get_last_name(name) 
 
    if equal(lastName, "Doe") then 
        printf(1, "CAUTION: Last name is really not known\n") 
    end if 
 
    printf(1, "Dear Mr. %s,\n\nThank you for your suggestion %s!", { lastName, firstName }) 
end for 

i.e. declaring variables inside of a loop and those variables not persisting? If so (I think that is what we are talking about), that feature brings huge benefit into clean function design. I really hated not being able to do it 3.1. Being able to is a big step ahead for Euphoria. It would be a terrible thing if this functionality were to be reverted.

If you want a variable to persist, then you declare it in the scope it should persist in. For example:

sequence names = { "John Doe", "Jim Doe", "Jack Doe", "Joe Doe" } 
sequence lastNameProcessed = "None" 
 
for i = 1 to length(names) do 
    sequence name = names[i] 
    sequence firstName = get_first_name(name) 
    sequence lastName = get_last_name(name) 
 
    if equal(lastName, "Doe") then 
        printf(1, "CAUTION: Last name is really not known\n") 
    end if 
 
    printf(1, "Dear Mr. %s,\n\nThank you for your suggestion %s!", { lastName, firstName }) 
 
    lastNameProcessed = named 
end for 
 
printf(1, "Sent %d messages, last name processed was %s\n", { length(names), lastNameProcessed }) 

This is clean design and I'd suggest that everyone begin programming by keeping the variable to the minimum scope necessary.

Jeremy