> I'd like to emphasize this (please, increase the font size, when you
> reading following phrase):
> 
> ...  a program that relies on a particular implementation of
> scheduling is wrong.

  There is still some mismatch.

  Sure, at one level, you can say that if you want to ensure some
ordering in a concurrent program, use a proper concurrency control
mechanism; don't rely on the implementation detail.

  But at another level, you can say that if you write your own
scheduler, use the full-knowledge of it.  There scheduler is just
another module of your system.  If using that knowledge makes the
product rock-solid, there is nothing wrong with it.

  And, with Andreas patch, normal programmer doesn't have to assume
the scheduling ordering.  His patch doesn't prevent people from using
a proper concurrency mechanism.

  In general, I agree that your statement above is a good principle,
but in current Squeak context, there is another path, too.

-- Yoshiki