> Wait - you were taking my post too literal.
> Foo::Bar syntax is like one name 'Foo:Bar', which has two parts. So for 
> me it is not a syntax for a message send.

Right, not a message send but..  to me anyway, just seems less "natural" than
what Brent suggested.

It's computerey, and not as inviting to non-nerds who might like to use Squeak,
but don't want to deal with nerdy-looking things like :: .  :)

> why not give them clear 
> separate names and use them accordingly?

I think it's clearer without :: .