Re: [e-lang] Are Guards Ambient Authorities?
Grant Husbands <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.capabilities.general,gmane.comp.lang.e.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Rob Meijer wrote: > Could you explain why guards would constitute any authority, either > ambient or not? (As Keven pointed out, I was wrong about the ambience.) The integer guard constitutes the ability to turn an object into an integer. I tend to conflate objects that confer non-local abilities with authorities, but I could be misunderstanding what authorities are, generally. By "non-local abilities" I mean things that can only be done with objects other than those that are or were parameters. > As a big fan of both generic programming and POLA related > constructs I would further propose that most (if not all) patterns that > rely on things like type guards for POLA at the expense of not being > generic are simply not applying the proper patterns to the problem. I agree, I think; my mental model of object-capability systems, until now, has always been duck-typed without even any type-guards. Since discovering type guards, I've been concerned about what happens when you extend the principle to cover more types, even though many type guards are obviously useful. Using them to the extent I'm worrying about would be a bad pattern. Regards, Grant Husbands.