Hi Tim,

> As I mentioned in a recent message, there is a problem with changing
> over to using these nice declarative pools classes. There's no
> particular problem with the new pools themselvs, it's an issue of our
> old friend backwards compatability.

Well, you can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs ;-) But I don't
see any particular problems with adopting an interim solution. E.g., use
declarative pools for everything that hurts us right now and leave
everything else as is (which means we won't have to worry about
WonderlandConstants or TextConstants right now). As far as I can tell, there
may be a few problems in some obscure places (such as you noticed in
SystemDictionary>>makeExternalRelease or similar) but these don't seem to be
overly problematic (as in: relatively easy to fix).

> Is _anybody_ actually interested in this problem? I could do with
> some help working out the issues and finding suitable solutions - 
> if any.

See above. I'm not certain I would *want* to change everything right now
(besides - we will have to support "dictionary style pools" for some time to
come anyways).

> My view is something along the lines of 'make the change and fix 
> the broken code' but I wouldn't want to impose my views on people
> willy-nilly. Perhaps a change like this can be piled up along with
> the new image format and massive VM back-compat rework?

See above. Gradual adoption seems possible to me and (although I haven't
tried it yet) I'm pretty certain that it will work even with stuff like
Anthony's closure compiler.

Cheers,
  - Andreas