The -l switch of /set is undocumented so arguing that I should use /set with an undocumented switch to use -n to make a local variable make little sense
What?? So you're not allowed to use undocumented switches now? If anything, you should be opening a bug report to document -l, not asking for a new feature because an existing feature is currently undocumented. If you know about the feature, you should use it, the fact that it is undocumented is likely an oversight, not an implication that you should be avoiding it. Indeed, if you want the behaviour of -n, you should be using /set -l. There's no need to have the same behaviour in different places. The only argument I could see would be the ability to set multiple global variables with a timer at the same time, but IMO that argument doesn't really stand up to practicality. The fact is we already have a way to do exactly what you need, so it seems to me as though you're just requesting this feature for the sake of keeping Khaled busy. I'd like to think he has better features to work on than adding new ways to do the same things.
