People who keep insisting on introducing such non-sense clearly have no idea about the origin and idea's behind pascal programming language.
Such features adds complexity, introduces inconsistency and is plain ugly to debug. On the fly-untyped variables... *barf*
I likely have more insight than most into what Mr. Wirth meant by his prototype of Pascal. Indeed he didn't like it enough and went on to new things such as Modula II (which inspired a lot of new features in Pascal as seen in TP from about 4.0 onward [as well as other compilers]). Pascal today is not what Mr. Wirth envisioned at the start but then many things are not.
Ada's type strictness was in large part inspired by Pascal - for very good reason. Further, it is MUCH MORE TYPE STRICT than Pascal.
And yet, for the simple purpose of loop control, no strict declaration of for loop control variables is required in Ada (it is, of course, allowed). This is why I proposed it here.
It is not complexity - it is simplicity. I'd venture that 90% or more of my loop control variables are named i,j,k,m,n,p,q (in about that order) and that 90% of them, further, are used for 15 lines of code, or less (maybe more if nested deep enough). They are ephemeral by their nature.
Such are certainly well taken care of when debugging Ada programs.
Finally, Pascal now allows the abomination of C operations like a+ = c albeit permitted by compiler directive (relief - may it never see my machine).
Now that is awful. Stupid. Insane bad style. Just as bad as curly braces. Of course that's not at all what I've suggested.
What I suggest is very natural however. In context, any programmer can see that a for loop needs an index. Needing to declare a type for it is quite redundant. Using the correct type for it is something the compiler can divine easily enough from the range or type of the begin/end values of the loop.
Further, it lends itself very well to register optimization of loop control variables. (May be redundant).
Finally, it was a suggestion. It certainly doesn't merit the ridicule you heap on it via a ridiculous comparison with a ridiculous idea from someone else.
Suggestions should be discussed - not dismissed out of hand because they fail your particular purity test.