On 9/18/07, Bert Freudenberg <bert at freudenbergs.de> wrote:
>
> > Oh no, are people really so strongly for ::?
>
> I'm rather strongly against ".". And not only because the dot is
> already too overloaded in Smalltalk.
>
> Dot-notation is becoming ubiquitous in "pop CS" to the point where
> people don't even admit there are alternatives. In one German state
> teaching "dot notation" to kids is made mandatory by the school
> administration, ruling out the use of Smalltalk as a teaching
> language. I kid you not.
>
> Having it creep into Squeak would make this individual sad. If this
> means anything to anybody ;)
>
> - Bert -

Well it does. :)  Personally I'm not so sold on '.', I just hate to
see <insert barage of hideous languages>'s :: come to Smalltalk as
well.

I don't think the dot is an option anyway given the obvious reasons
which have already been covered.

What do you think of message syntax for this?  I think it could be
done at compile time as well, since the compiler is determining the
reciever of a message anyway.