Just few simples notes:

* It's special. I feel like I'm in 'Basic'. A bit wordy...

* Viewing an initialize method, I feel like I'm in AppleScript e.g. [Set, To, Return]. But
in the same time it's not too far away from the Smalltalk syntax, so somebody can still
learns ST.

E.g.:  SET bounds to 0 @ 0 corner (50 @ 40)
            bounds _ 0 @ 0 corner: 50 @ 40

The ":" in 'corner:' in ST syntax tells you that a parameter is 'attendu'; in the new
syntax we can ask: is corner a command ?, a variable?, or a message ? and do it use
parameters ?
To be coherent with the new syntax should corner:  become corner( ) ...like JAVA
constructor ?

* Globaly the syntax look simple, but we have to use it to have a feel of it and have a
judgment on it. This needs "Experiencing". So I will use it a while.

* I don't understand why we can't create a new class or a method whith the
'printAlternateSyntax' on. 

* It seems that we can only read ST code that way but we can't write with that syntax ! Is
it only to ease the reading of the code ?