Eric Arseneau wrote:

> Is there any problem in adding support for zero and one argument blocks for
> ifNotNil ???

What happened was that these messages got inlined/optimized just like the
IfTrue: et al. messages. Someone also suggested a really informative name
for the 1-argument variant (less than a month ago I think), and there seemed
to be an agreement that this was better than having an optional argument to
the regular ifNotNil:, but no one submitted any code for it.

Henrik