🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <7096@well.UUCP> shf@well.UUCP (Stuart H. Ferguson) writes:
>I don't see a reason to react so strongly against GURU conditions.  It
There is just one reason. when people see them they get upset, esp.
people like J Pournelle who, like it or not, really can affect 
how many amiga's get purchased. I really agree with Rick on this one.
Think of the GURU as really bad PR (which it is) which can 
adversely affect amiga's sales. 
   Dale makes a good point that the code SHOULD be perfect. But we
all know (or at least i think i know) how likely this is. If the 
tradeoff is slow suffocation (libraries hanging around that are 
no longer open) vs. even a recoverable GURU, i vote for suffocation. 
With the 1mb minimum common on most machines i don't see that 
a few extra open libraries will kill you. But too many GURUs will kill
amiga sales. God i wish they hadn't called it a guru. I get so sick
of the jokes about that one ...
   Now a library could attempt to keep track of when bogosity occurs.
That's a whole nother issue. and of course the right answer is 
resource tracking. But we have to use what we have, not what we should
have.
ron