>>>Again, HOW does it make the code less maintainable and what possible bug could be introduced? The nano-seconds (if that) of execution time?
>>
>>Maybe it's when the scan's alias is changed upstream. For instance, we used to Scan For through our table, but now have a cursor derived from it... and then we also have to remember to select the new alias at the end of the loop, where it still says Select MyTable. That's one more thing to maintain, and IMO, without a good reason.
>
>Actually, the SCAN will work just fine even if you change its alias but not the SELECT at the end. The ENDSCAN still carries an explicit SELECT.

I know - and that select can be completely wrong, but any adverse effect would be nullified by the implicit select. So we have a bad line of code which now only serves to confuse the reader.

>But like you, I'd be wondering "what's this doing here?". I'd be wondering if there wasn't some other block of code that was removed and the developer who removed it forgot to take a line.

Exactly - this is, IMO, clearer than what I wrote.