http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=6353

In the standard, #skip: should explicetly not raise an error if #skip:
would go after the end. It is said that "A number of objects equal to
the lesser of amount and the size of the receiver's future sequence
values are removed..."

The current implementation raises an error. Do we choose the current
implementation our the standard ? If you have other Smalltalk
implementations at hand, what did they choose ?

Code:
  (ReadStream on: 'test') skip: 6

-- 
Damien Cassou