> IIRC, SmalltalkAgents did that and more: it ignored extra
> arguments to a block and added extra <nil> arguments if needed.
> Some may see danger or ugliness here but it did simplify some
> things. You might think of it as a variable length message with
> the most important stuff up front. If you can tell from the first
> part of the message everything you need to know, why bother
> looking at the rest?

I find that the safety provided by the arg count failure to be very useful.
I find myself many times over thinking my code works great because the
debugger didn't show up.  And not until I delve much deeper into the guts do
I find out that something went wrong.  Now I know it could just be my stupid
way of coding, each his own ;->, and then again I could just be wrong, NOT
;-)