re: Flow integration

Hi Cees--

> Without my giving any qualification whatsoever on the qualities of Flow, I
> think I have to agree with Andreas.

	Hmm. I'm not sure what "agreeing with Andreas" actually means at the
moment, since, from his responses so far, I think he missed some of what
I was saying.

> Why not leave Stream and introduce a FlowStream (or FlwStream, whatever)?

	Because, in my experience, people tend to actually test things more
when the *old* stuff gets the name changes.

> In a year or so, when Flow has proven itself...

	Heh. Another year...

> I think that going through great lengths to provide compatibility for
> old code is extremely important.

	I agree, and I think what I propose does this.


	thanks,

-C

--
Craig Latta
improvisational musical informaticist
[email protected]
www.netjam.org/resume
Smalltalkers do: [:it | All with: Class, (And love: it)]