Dear Richard,

Thank you for your full and meaty response. :-)

> Given the way that the compiler open-codes #or: and #and:, it could be
> quite costly to "fix" #and: and #or:.

Since #and: and #or: do not promise to evaluate their arguments, the
fact that they do not determine whether they are Booleans or not does
not seem like a bug. If you do not evaluate them, how do you know? That
is why I confined my remarks to & and |.

And, as far as I can tell by looking at the method code, & and | do not
live up to that promise, anyway. Shouldn't they?

----
    True>>& alternativeObject 
	"Evaluating conjunction -- answer alternativeObject since receiver is
true."

	^alternativeObject
----
    False>>& alternativeObject 
	"Evaluating conjunction -- answer false since receiver is false."

	^self
----
    True>>| aBoolean 
	"Evaluating disjunction (OR) -- answer true since the receiver is
true."

	^self
----
    False>>| aBoolean 
	"Evaluating disjunction (OR) -- answer with the argument, aBoolean."

	^aBoolean
----

Thanks,

Bill