With only four days to go until freeze, I wanted the change to be in so 
that we could decide how to set the defaults after 4.1 is out. It'll 
give us more options to decide how to deal with it.

Cheers,
   - Andreas

On 3/12/2010 8:14 PM, Andreas Raab wrote:
> Folks -
>
> Attached my take on selectors with underscores. It basically separates
> the issue of using underscores in assignment from the issue of using
> underscores in selectors, puts this into two individual preferences, and
> allows per-class scoping while providing a system-wide default.
>
> The possible combinations of preferences are:
>
> * allowUnderscoreAssignments off, allowUnderscoreSelectors: off
> The use of underscores is forbidden, i.e., the Croquet model.
>
> * allowUnderscoreAssignments on, allowUnderscoreSelectors: off
> The classic Squeak usage; all of the following are assignments:
>
> a _ b => a := b
> b_ c => b := c
> d _e => d := e
> f_g => f := g.
>
> * allowUnderscoreAssignments off, allowUnderscoreSelectors: on
> The standard usage in other dialects
>
> a _ b => ((a) _) b
> b_ c => (b_) c
> d _e => (d) _e
> f_g => (f_g)
>
> * allowUnderscoreAssignments on, allowUnderscoreSelectors: on
> The hybrid usage requiring spaces around underscore for assignment:
>
> a _ b => a := b
> b_ c => (b_) c
> d _e => (d) _e
> f_g => (f_g)
>
> This gives us a range of options to decide how to deal with it. I would
> personally say that for the core image we should go with the first
> option (disable underscores altogether) and only enable whichever option
> we like for the release.
>
> What do people think about this approach? I think it provides the most
> options and gives us ample flexibility to decide what we'd like to use
> down the road.
>
> If there is no fundamental opposition I'll push it into the trunk in a
> couple of days.
>
> Cheers,
> - Andreas
>
>
>
>