> 	(1) When are ReadOnlyVariableBindings created,

Never. I just had a discussion with Tim about where exactly they should be
created.

> 	(2) Why is this mechanism not applied to those other 
> 388 classes, and

Because they were "manually" installed.

> 	(3) If ReadOnlyVariableBindings were used uniformly, would 
> they not solve the problem of turning PoolDictionaries into classes 
> and then protecting them from overwriting

They would, but in turn they would break any attempt to file in code which
(accidentally or not) attempts to store over them. Which is exactly what I
meant by "break those stinky eggs".

> Along the way, I encountered a need to clean up the various kinds of 
> Association, for example, so that ReadOnlyVariableBindings print as a 
> -> b.  But that is another topic.

It used to print that way. I don't remember when this got changed (but
likely to indicate that these bindings are NOT associations).

Cheers,
  - Andreas