someone should either make CP syntax an option-guarded feature, or write tests that exercise how CP might interact with local functions

[jamescheney]

cf. #946

[slindley]

Isn't the issue that we should have some tests that exercise the "CP syntax" at all? Or is there really some specific non-trivial interaction with local functions that you have in mind?

The poorly-named "CP syntax" (the useful part of it doesn't really have much to do with CP) is not going to be removed any time soon. It is useful for avoiding repeatedly renaming a channel.