On Wed, 26 Jan 2000, Andrew C. Greenberg wrote:

> think deeper! 

You're right. The "nil ifNotNil:" case indeed does return the receiver. I
did not see this.

> For all of the following messages:
> 
> 	#ifNil: #ifNotNil: #ifNil:ifNotNil #ifNotNil:#ifNil:
> 
> If the receiver is boolean, then answer the value of the 
> corresponding parameter block if there is one, otherwise answer self.

I like that specification (you surely meant nil for boolean). Maybe we
should put it into the method comments.

> I think things are OK.  

That's what I wanted to express, although with wrong arguments.

  -Bert-