Re: v112 U2--just to clarify

["Robert Holmgren" holmgren@xxxxxxxx]

** Reply to note from "J. R. Fox"  on Mon, 09 Sep
2002 17:54:31 -0800

Jordan:

Re: candidates for U2

> Unless some [debut-in-maillist frames] just fall through the cracks,

Very few evaporate in the fog of forgetting

> I'm guessing it must
> be how useful a new frame is apt to be to how many users . . . .

Sure. And how general the purpose. If a routine is very narrow, and
tailored to one situation only -- unless a critical situation (e.g.
saving a loaded Help file, which is normally impossible) -- it either
gets generalized (LISTWDS just emerged at the "public" end of a
specific-to-general evolution, from a list of occurrences of one
particular character, to any $tring), or it gets tossed -- or tacked
on to the end of our own personal U2s, as reminders that
might-come-in-handy-someday.

This may not be the place, but anyone who has a whiz of a routine in
the bag, or an idea for a whiz routine, or a critical need for a
general, *publicly-useful* routine, is most welcome to pass it on to
us, or absolutely to air the idea. It was never our intent to
monopolize U2, but rather to create a structure flexible enough to
accommodate just about any program, and to encourage by example
contributions from others. The only aspect of this U2 project that
has disappointed me is the small number of users who kicked in with
ideas or real code -- I anticipated that there were oodles of
routines out there (apropos of nothing, some stalwarts may recall my
1980s predecessor to U2 called OODLES, of which there are numerous
traces still in U2). Sometimes the most outlandish ideas turn out to
be not only feasible, but quite engrossing to actualize.

----------
Robert Holmgren
holmgren@xxxxxxxx
----------