On Thu, 01 Jun 2000 14:41:48 +0200 Stefan Matthias Aust <sma at 3plus4.de> wrote:
>Can be remove vmTable:at:, yes?  It's identical to vmParameterAt: and has 
>no sender.  I just ask because perhaps somebody relays on this method.

Stefan,

While the comment may seem similar to that in #vmParameterAt:, it's just plain wrong. Primitive 254 does different things depending on the number of arguments, so #vmTable:at: actually provides functionality identical to #vmParameterAt:put:. 

Cheers,
Bob