Richard O'Keefe wrote
> Surely this is back to front? #includesAllOf: reads well and is
> compatible with GNU Smalltalk (and classic Squeak), while #includesAll:
> doesn't work in most of the Smalltalks I have access to.
>
> My own library has
> {includes,excludes}{All,Any,None,One}Of:
> which wouldn't read nearly so well without "Of".Yes, this makes sense! I will fix that example Thank you -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html
