>At 7:29 Uhr -0800 30.03.1999, Dan Ingalls wrote:
>> 123 size no longer responds with 0.
>> nil size no longer responds with 0.
>
>Why ?
>
>I found the latter extremely handy in cases where one could get back either
>a (possibly empty) collection or nil.


I agree with the why question. Many collections are lazy initialized and
that makes nil size really useful. Moreover, size is a basic message; one
expects that any object can nicely respond to it.

Leandro