Re: Joe-E Taming Policies

For the most part, the prohibitions you've encountered are a result of 
the taming process being incomplete at present -- there are a lot of 
would-be-safe classes that we haven't looked at yet.  We're hoping to 
add more on an on-demand basis, so people can build more stuff with it. 
   StringBuffer and StringBuilder should both be safe; the only reason 
one is currently allowed and not the other is that we have mostly written
single-threaded (or vat-based-concurrency) code, which does not need 
StringBuffer's thread-safety.

Hashtable is unsafe to use if you want Joe-E's determinism guarantees to 
hold: the iteration order of the hashtable depends on the hash codes 
assigned to the objects placed in it; for many classes, the hash code is 
nondeterministic as it is the JVM's internal identifier for the object 
instance.  Hashtable is OK if you do not need the determinism guarantees.

-Adrian

Mohsen Vakilian wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Can anyone explain the rationale behind the following Joe-E error 
> messages? I don't see why the following classes should be disabled by 
> Joe-E. For instance, does creating a StringBuffer as a local variable of 
> a method cause impurity? Why is StringBuilder allowed but not StringBuffer?
> 
> Disabled constructor from class ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException called: 
> default deny
> Method from disabled type Hashtable called: no policy specified for this 
> class
> Disabled constructor from class StringBuffer called: default deny
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> e-lang mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.eros-os.org/mailman/listinfo/e-lang