Am 20.09.2011 05:57, schrieb Will Robertson:
> On 20/09/2011, at 4:13 AM, Frank Mittelbach wrote:
>
>> I think bottom line we don't really need them any more these days.
>> The only reason why I would keep them is that for fast access to
>> variables when experimenting/developing (without needing to declare
>> something first), but for proper packages it is far better come up
>> with your own private scratch names.
>
> I agree with this, but I don't think we should remove anything that's
> been around for a while now. I suggest removing the just-added clist
> scratch variables and keeping what remains as they are -- but not
> adding any others.

my takeaway is actually different. I would suggest to keep the tmp 
variables and provide for each datatype exactly two/four default ones 
(also for the new types)

\l_tmpa_int
\l_tmpb_int
\g_tmpa_int
\g_tmpb_int

In the general documentation we might explain the issue and risks and 
that we suggest to carefully consider in packages for general use to 
define "private" scratch variables instead, and that those here here for 
convenience as some people prefer this style of programming.

Frank