Re: Reentrancy via Recursion

On Feb 26, 2009, at 5:46, Toby Murray wrote:

> Would the addition of another invocation operator (on top of "." and
> "<-") to E that means
> "immediate-call-to-untrusted-object-that-shouldn't-be-able-to- 
> recursively-call-me"
> be fair? Being able to use such an operator would enable the  
> programmer
> not to have to worry about these kinds of bugs.


Having such an operation would expose (by whether it succeeds or  
fails) information about the stack, and break determinism.

-- 
Kevin Reid                            <http://homepage.mac.com/kpreid/>