> Can it be that you guys are misunderstanding each other?

Not likely ;-) I see perfectly well the arguments for shadowing but it seems
to me most people who arguing in favour of shadowing have never been bitten
by it. So I'd recommend that those people really load the Win32Fonts, get
the Symbol font and start hacking ParagraphEditor. That'll cure them faster
than anything ;-)

> So, therefore I suggested to 
> 
> a) disallow interactively creating class variables that shadow globals
> b) warn if a conflict occurs non-interactively (e.g., while loading a
> package)
> c) change the semantics of Squeak (i.e., make a trivial fix to the
> compiler) so that even in the intermediate state (i.e., 
> between the time when the conflict occurs and the time when
> it is resolved), everything works fine.
> 
> Could you all live with that?

I don't even like the idea of referencing the shadowed globals interactively
without being explicit about what you mean. What I am arguing for is simply
the same rules that we have already in place for temps.

Cheers,
  - Andreas