but not putting it on Object would change the feature since you /do want it/ returning self on that case.No. In that case, you want to use ifNil: , not ifNilOrEmpty:.The only thing Object >> ifNilOrEmpty would support, is putting both collections and non-collection in the same variable, which is usually a bad idea to begin with, since it will lead to "are you a collection or single instance?" checks in almost every user of said variable.
+ 100.
Cheers, Henry
