Hello all, You might recall my advocating breaking changes to #next, #next: and company: these methods do not behave as advertised, answering nil vs. raising an exception when reading off the back of a stream. It was fairly clear that the will did not exist to make he required changes, so I have put myself on a strict diet of #nextOne, #nextMany:, #nextAvailable: that *do* work as expected. I plan to make code for these methods available to all, and strongly recommend using them. My initial efforts with Citezen have convinced me that I am correct to demand that code function as advertised/expected. I lost a couple of hours trying to sort out whether I was faced with a debugger defect, but ended up finding a source of inconsistency among like-named methods. Look at implementors of #nextLine. First, this is perhaps ambiguous given Pharo's cross-platform nature - it might be wise to always specify CrLf or simply Lf??? Beyond that, some implementations answer nil (why is beyond me, as it leaves callers with two things to check when #notEmpty would otherwise almost always suffice). Any thoughts? If nothing else, I think the various #nextLine methods should behave alike, and as you can tell, I strongly favor answering empty vs. nil. Bill