Re: E patches for review: ELoader, seedVat
Thomas Leonard <tal-v5nx5w6akNyLE8xUarVfuPLx9OUvmyODWmv/[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lang.e.general |
|---|---|
| Organization | IT Innovation |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Mon, 2010-05-24 at 09:50 -0400, Kevin Reid wrote: [...] > Ah. Your question is not 'how to uncall makeTraceln' but 'how to > uncall the loader'. And the answer is to use 'something else'. > > Since makeELoader gives authority to log with arbitrary prefixes, it > should not be exposed: so loader objects, i.e. <this> must not use > __optUncall but rather some amplifier. > > The role to be filled loader/uncaller pair which gives access to > "process authorities" such as makeTraceln and <file> objects, allowing > them to be passed between vats... but shouldn't the usual set, > [<unsafe>, <file>, ...] suffice for that? Maybe we need something > extensible in that set (i.e. an unsealer amplifier with a public > sealer) so that your ELoaders can be uncalled by that? Is it possible to use sealers with PassByCopy objects? There are a number of objects (e.g. <file:...>, ELoaders) that could be pass-by-copy over boot-comm (but pass-by-proxy over CapTP) but would need to use __optSealedDispatch. -- Dr Thomas Leonard IT Innovation Centre 2 Venture Road Southampton Hampshire SO16 7NP Tel: +44 0 23 8076 0834 Fax: +44 0 23 8076 0833 mailto:tal-v5nx5w6akNyLE8xUarVfuPLx9OUvmyODWmv/[email protected] http://www.it-innovation.soton.ac.uk