small **0..1->? optimization, saves an array
**0..1 => ? for <deflongname>
Fix for all but one of the concurrency tests

But it shouldn't have made a difference (I don't think)  :-(
**0..1 => ? for <twigil>
**0..1 => ? in <morename>
**0..1 => ? for <statement_mod_[cond|loop]>
Slightly different approach to fixing :catch
Fix :catch, thanks jnthn++ for another set of eyes
**0..1 => ? for <longname>
**0..1 => ? for statement_control:sym<if> and <loop>
**0..1 => ? for <multisig>
Fix for #120501: my &a; say &a # Callable not Any
**0..1 => ? for <signature>
**0..1 => ? for <signature>

(The commit before this one was for <initializer>.)
**0..1 => ? in statement_control:sym<require>
**0..1 => ? about <typename>
**0..1 => ? for <capture>
**0..1 => ? for <param_var>
**0..1 => ? for pir::op and nqp::op
Mention Increase/Decrease to be deprecated in 2013.11