RetroSearch Browse

Sat Jul 15 08:59:53 CEST 2006 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-July/067455.html

"Guido van Rossum" <guido at python.org> wrote:
>
> OK, then I propose that we wait to see which things you end up having
> to provide to sandboxed code, rather than trying to analyze it to
> death in abstracto.

However, the ORIGINAL proposal in this thread (to split off argv[0]
and/or make that and the arguments read-only) is entirely different.
That is purely a matter of convenience, cleanliness of specification
or whatever you call it.  I can't imagine any good reason to separate
argv[0] from argv[1:] by a sandbox (either way).

Regards,
Nick Maclaren,
University of Cambridge Computing Service,
New Museums Site, Pembroke Street, Cambridge CB2 3QH, England.
Email:  nmm1 at cam.ac.uk
Tel.:  +44 1223 334761    Fax:  +44 1223 334679

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-July/067455.html below:

[Python-Dev] Handling of sys.args (Re: User's complaints)