Is this desirable?

I notice that the "existing blah through next/last" is warned of
even though the label should be in one's lexical scope.  Isn't it
the dynamic scope jump that's the scary one?  Or are they
both too scary to live?

--tom

        local *confirm = sub () { 
            next PATHNAME unless accesstty();
            print TTYOUT $renaming 
                    ? "rename $oldname to $newname? "
                    : "symlink $oldslink to point to $newname? ";
            my $answer = <TTYIN>;
>>>>        no warnings 'exiting';  # hush you! it's in my lexical scope!
            last PATHNAME  unless defined $answer;  # exit?
            chomp $answer;
            last PATHNAME  if     "QUIT" =~ /^\Q$answer/i;
            next PATHNAME  unless "YES"  =~ /^\Q$answer/i;
        };

        confirm() if $inspect;

        #  "I'd like to teach 
        #       The world to race 
        #           In perfect hackery!"
        my $was_there = do { 
            no warnings 'newline';
            -e $newname;
        };

        if ($renaming) {

            if ($was_there && !$inspect && $careful) {
                confirm() unless $force || $quiet;
                next PATHNAME if $quiet;  
            } 

            unless (vrename($oldname, $newname)) {
                warn "$0: can't rename $oldname to $newname: $!\n";
                $errcnt++;
                next PATHNAME;
            } 

        } 

• Is this desirable? by Tom Christiansen