"Needed? just do it anyhow."
Clearly this wouldn't suit Jan's application.
There is no such fact established in this thread, there is a "want" and so what, is there a "need"?

"I know, thus I used the word "risky" not "impossible""
In what way do you see it as risky?
Just about anything related to IAP is "risky", the risk related to a power outage or noise spike at a critical moment.
In my opinion any "programming" that is not full, complete and restartable after a failure happening at any time is "risky".

"The IAP code is for programming (thus the 'P') using code for something it was not intended for is, at best, risky."
If I understand you correctly you think that the IAP routines are only intended to be used to replace the currently running program with another? There is no such restriction.
If so, why 'P' for programming, not "MW" or such?

Erik