Re: Syntax of GNU Smalltalk class definitions

> This [ ... ] is not a block closure and the "extend" is more like a
> keyword to indicate this special construct.

"like"?  Is it a reserved keyword?  Does that mean you can't define
a method called `extend`?

What about the case of "C1 :subclass C2 [...]", is "subclass:" also
a reserved keyword?  Does it also prevent using method called
`:subclass`?

What about uses of `extend` or `subclass:` elsewhere than at top-level?

Also within such a "set of methods", I see two different method
definitions:

    <method-selector> [<method-body>]
    
and

    <class> class >> <method-selector> [<method-body>]
    
what happens if <class> is another class than the one for which this
block is defining methods?

why do we need both the `class` and the `>>` keywords to define those
class methods?

Are there other possible valid elements than those two?

Where is this documented (other than by showing examples)?


        Stefan