I've just tracked down a nasty little problem

porting some code to Pharo.�� As a result, I

have added to the comments in my own versions

of these methods.�� �� beginsWith: aSequence
�� �� �� "Answer true if aSequence is a prefix of the receiver.
�� �� �� ��This makes sense for all sequences.
�� �� �� ��There is a compatibility issue concerning 'abc' beginsWith: ''
�� �� �� ��+ VisualWorks, Dolphin, astc, GNU ST (where the method is
�� �� �� �� ��called #startsWith:) and VisualAge (where the method
�� �� �� �� ��is called #wbBeginsWith:)
�� �� �� �� ��agree than EVERY sequence begins with an empty prefix.
�� �� �� ��- Squeak and Pharo
�� �� �� �� ��agree that NO sequence begins with an empty sequence.
�� �� �� ��# ST/X chooses compatibility with Squeak, heaving a big unhappy
�� �� �� �� ��sigh, and adds #startsWith: to have something sensible to use.
������ ���� Now ST/X *thinks* it is compatible with VW, though it isn't, so 
�� �� �� ��I wonder if this was a bug that VW fixed and Squeak didn't? �� ��
�� �� �� ��astc goes with the majority here.�� This is also compatible with
�� �� �� ��Haskell, ML, and with StartsWith in C# and startsWith in Java."
�� �� �� ^self beginsWith: aSequence ignoringCase: false

 �� �� endsWith: aSequence
�� �� �� "Answer true if aSequence is a suffix of the receiver.
�� �� �� ��This makes sense for all sequences.
�� �� �� ��There is a compatibility issue concerning 'abc' endsWith: ''. ��
�� �� �� ��+ VisualWorks, Dolphin, astc, GNU ST, and VisualAge (where �� �� 
�� �� �� �� ��the method is called #wbEndsWith:)
�� �� �� �� ��agree that EVERY sequence ends with an empty suffix.
�� �� �� ��- Squeak and Pharo
�� �� �� �� ��agree that NO sequence ends with an empty suffix.
�� �� �� ��# ST/X chooses compatibility with the majority, apparently
�� �� �� �� ��unaware that this makes #beginsWith: and #endsWith: inconsistent.
�� �� �� ��astc goes with the majority here.�� This is also compatible with
�� �� �� ��Haskell, ML, C#, and Java."
�� �� �� ^self endsWith: aSequence ignoringCase: false 

Does anyone have any idea

��- why Squeak and Pharo are the odd ones out?

��- why anyone thought making #beginsWith: and #endsWith:, um, "quirky"

���� was a good idea (it's pretty standard in books on the theory of

���� strings to define "x is a prefix of y iff there is a z such that

���� y = x concatenated with z")

��

I was about to try to file a bug report for the first time,

then realised that maybe other people don't think this IS a bug.