Colin Putney wrote:
> On 16-Nov-09, at 5:46 PM, Andreas Raab wrote:
>> From a practical perspective, I feel quite comfortable with saying 
>> that Seaside support is a priority to the point that it might be 
>> driving issues like String/Symbol comparisons, underscores in 
>> selectors etc. If Cincom, Dolphin, GST, Gemstone and VA support a 
>> particular feature in Seaside in a particular way, I think we should 
>> consider it as well.
> 
> Another practical compatibility issue is literal syntax for ByteArrays. 
> Just about all the other Smalltalks have it, including Pharo. I ran into 
> this while trying to update OmniBrowser to the latest Refactoring code. 
> Any objections to implementing it?

If that's a real issue, knock yourself out. Assuming you mean #[1 2 3] 
syntax (i.e., no conflict with any existing constructs).

Cheers,
   - Andreas