>>>>> "SM" == Skip Montanaro <skip@mojam.com> writes: Ken> We haven't even seen a satisfactory approach to referring to Ken> the function, itself, from within the function. Maybe it's not Ken> even desirable to be able to do that - that's an interesting Ken> question. SM> I hereby propose that within a function the special name __ SM> refer to the function. I think the syntax is fairly obscure. I'm neurtral on the whole idea of having a special way to get at the function object from within the body of the code. Also, the proposal to handle security policies using attributes attached to the function seems wrong. The access control decision depends on the security policy defined for the object *and* the authorization of the caller. You can't decide based solely on some attribute of the function, nor can you assume that every call of a function object will be made with the same authorization (from the same protection domain). Jeremy
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4