auto -> auto & var

[james]

In article <441B161B.4010109 at nospam.org>, Georg Wrede says...
>
>Unknown W. Brackets wrote:
>> Here's what I hate about var: I use JavaScript a lot (this happens when 
>> you make interactive websites for a living.)  What do you mean, that's 
>> not a reason?
>> 
>> Sure it is.  In JavaScript and other scripting languages, this would be 
>> valid:
>> 
>> var x;
>> 
>> // Okay, let's make it an array!
>> x = new Array(1, 2, 3);
>> 
>> // Actually, you know what, I take that back.
>> x = "1,2,3";
>> 
>> // Come to think, this might be better...
>> x = {0: 1, 1: 2, 2: 3};
>> 
>> // No, no, actually it just needs one.  How clueless of me.
>> x = 1;
>
>Breaking the unfortunate "auto" into two separate words would be very 
>good. But like you say, "var" may not be a good candidate. Especially 
>when a change in the language should strive to _improve_ it, and not 
>merely substitute one problem for another.
>
>Ideally a programming language should be readable without having to 
>think and remember stuff (that has with the language itself to do). All 
>the needed mental gymnastics should pertain to the source code itself 
>and its semantics. Not to those of the language.
>
><stab> If we wanted to save keywords, we could surely find lots of other 
>places where we could use the same word for different things, without it 
>becoming awkward for the compiler. But so far we haven't done that. It 
>would be just dumb. </stab>

What is the current status of this issue? What is Walters thinking?