On 14.04.2010, at 15:15, Ian Trudel wrote:
> 
> 2010/4/14 Torsten Bergmann <astares at gmx.de>:
>> Couldnt we follow the other Smalltalks who seem to
>> have no problem with it and the good old rule to
>> keep it simple.
> 
> Don't we have different priorities as a community than other Smalltalk
> dialects? My point is that we have limited development resources and
> this very specific feature does not add anything other than a
> preference in style. The reward is too little. I vote for a better
> prioritizing of features to be supported. ;)

Everyone has different priorities here. But if someone chooses to put time into a certain feature they need, and it is acceptable to the rest, why resist it?

The basic consensus was to support underscores, but to not use them in official packages (unless there were very compelling reasons to do so, which yet have to be demonstrated).

- Bert -