We've seen this before when talking about lvalue subs! ;-)

Yes. We have haven't we. It has been a recurrent theme of ours.:)

Though they fixed the original problem of any one sourcecode statement only having a single lvalue ref that got reused each time that statement was reexecuted.

I thought that had fixed the problems--but maybe my notion of what an lvalue ref should do is different from what the authors envisaged?