RetroSearch Browse

Sat Dec 20 11:39:31 EST 2003 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2003-December/041274.html

On Sat, Dec 20, 2003, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 20, 2003 at 10:55:48AM -0500, Aahz wrote:
>>Luke: 
>>>
>>>  to some extent, i didn't care about things like __class__ because
>>>  1) the users weren't that bright.
>>>  2) the user's weren't that hostile.
>> 
>> Yup.  By "what's the point?" I didn't mean that there were no use cases;
>> the problem is that such cases are not frequent enough to justify the
>> effort.
>  
>  ... which is why i made some recommendations to add in the concept
>  of run-time-defineable public and protected class interfaces.
> 
>  such a concept 1) fits with the principle of capabilities 2)
>  is an enhancement that goes beyond the small requirements of
>  restricted execution 3) offers a means through which rexec
>  can be implemented.

Sure.  *If* we decide to implement restricted execution.  As I made
clear with my comments about CPU and memory usage, there's still no
consensus that adding a restricted execution environment to Python
represents a good use of community resources.
-- 
Aahz (aahz at pythoncraft.com)           <*>         http://www.pythoncraft.com/

Weinberg's Second Law: If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote 
programs, then the first woodpecker that came along would destroy civilization.

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2003-December/041274.html below:

[Python-Dev] Re: Capabilities - published interfaces