thanks for your explanation, it is quite amazing :)

actually what I wanted is a simple way to get a string which, when 
compiled (Compiler evaluate: suchAString) would hand me a plain [1 +1] 
block. all of this without leaving the image !

is there a way to do so ? do we have to wait for full closures ? as 
there is no temp vars in [1 + 1], I really do not get why the whole 
image has to be scanned: I expected such a block to be easily abstracted 
out of its context. well I don't know much about these things... I guess 
a store string is not exactly what I believed :)


thanks,

Stef


>>try this (printIt) in a workspace (beware, it will not return and may 
>>hang the system for good):
>>
>>[1 + 1] storeString
> 
> Not at all surprising in the current system (assuming a 37-5989-full
> image) since this will effectively try to make a store string of
> the entire image.