(j3.2006) Does anybody remember why ...?

[Van Snyder]

Does anybody remember why a BLOCK construct is not mentioned in 16.5.1.4
[10-007r1:443:27] as having access to its host instance by host
association?

The only problem with doing that, that I can think of today, is access
to statement labels of the containing scope.  But isn't that covered by
"inclusive scope?"

Shouldn't the rules in 16.5.1.4p2 [10-007r1:443:35ff] apply to BLOCK
constructs?  I don't see where they're applied.

If a BLOCK construct could access its host instance by host association,
items (5) and (6) in 7.1.11p2 [10-007r1:150:15-18] wouldn't be needed,
because of item (4).