World: r3wp
[Core] Discuss core issues
older newer | first last |
Volker 6-Jan-2006 [3132] | If the interpreter can find a way from the console to the access, a selfmade "interpreter" can find it too. |
MichaelB 6-Jan-2006 [3133x2] | I think the problem is simply that one can't really prevent the use of the words in the code of the functions in the object. |
Jep. | |
JaimeVargas 6-Jan-2006 [3135] | MichaelB. I thought I have done it. Ok. It was a good try. I like the first version though. I enables for some neat stuff. Even when having some holes. |
MichaelB 6-Jan-2006 [3136] | Volker: actually you explanation sounds almost like a proof to forget it completely. Too simple - but Rebol is all about words getting interpreted. |
Volker 6-Jan-2006 [3137] | I think that is no big problem. If you give code-control, you are doomed anyway. Hmm, could be used to have a password to login and destroy it reliable. The secure way is to launch an external process to run user-code IMHO. Add 'secure unset 'struct! and hope there are no overflowes. Should be pretty save. |
MichaelB 6-Jan-2006 [3138] | Jaime: I saved you code - it's nice nevertheless. :-) |
Volker 6-Jan-2006 [3139x2] | Not completely - the code still needs access to the global context. if you bind every word in an own context and put selected functions there, it would work. Still tricky, for example 'second can not be exposed, else you get the functions body. I may forget other issues. |
BTW would be nice if secure would support ulimit-calls. | |
MichaelB 6-Jan-2006 [3141x2] | That's one of my problems if I would like to have capability security in Rebol - all these omnipotent (is this the right word?) words, shouldn't be allowed - eg. only if my code gives out the right to introspect itself something like 'second should be calleable. |
what does that mean ? the secure thing ? | |
Volker 6-Jan-2006 [3143x2] | something like secure [file quit %./public allow memory 2000 timeout 2] |
There are cals for such restrictions in linux AFAIK, could be used on osses whith such features. | |
JaimeVargas 6-Jan-2006 [3145] | Ah. MichaelB, You want E. |
Volker 6-Jan-2006 [3146] | Can E restrict runtime too? To kill infinite loops? |
JaimeVargas 6-Jan-2006 [3147] | Don't know E. Only know that E offers the capability model. BTW, Infinite loops are only a worry if they consume resources. You could in theory always have lazy loops (which are infinite by default). |
Volker 6-Jan-2006 [3148x2] | I want to run user-code for a request. Would prefer if that finishes after a while. Or, to resrict cpu-usage at least. Hmm, i guess e has threads, so could use a guard-thread maybe. if killing that is secure. |
Is there a web-server in e? To use rebol thru cgi-style api? | |
JaimeVargas 6-Jan-2006 [3150] | lazy infinity loops == threads, almost. |
Volker 6-Jan-2006 [3151] | Do you know how to do cgi-style-calls in c? where c and rebol communicate thru kind of bidirectional pipeline? |
MichaelB 6-Jan-2006 [3152] | I'm no E expert - just know it from reading - but I like the capability model. So I guess E has nothing to restrict the runtime - I thought due to the fact that it can't be predicted, whether a computation stops, there will be anyway always some "hole". But I would like to have some restrictions on CPU usage say for windows (as Solaris seams to have it) - can't stand that copying some files can kill the whole system. But maybe this is something what doesn't belong to the language but to the OS offering the foundation ? |
JaimeVargas 6-Jan-2006 [3153] | But language can help here. |
MichaelB 6-Jan-2006 [3154] | Jaime as you talked about Haskell lately: if I remember correctly it has lazy evaluation, so would this help in the general case ? Was this what you were pointing to ? |
JaimeVargas 6-Jan-2006 [3155x3] | Yes. I think that anyone will benefit from reading this: http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/chapters/0262220695chap1.pdf (It inspired me to write make-instance). |
BTW I just changed make instance to use closures. I like it better. | |
make-instance: closure [ class [object!] /local class-vars instance-data class-methods v ][ class-vars: copy [*-private-*] class-methods: copy [] instance-data: copy [] foreach w next first class [ either function! = type? v: get in class :w [ append class-methods compose/deep [ (to set-word! :w) func [(first :v)] [ bind second get in class (to lit-word! :w) '*-private-* do reduce [get in class (to lit-word! :w) (first :v)] ] ] ][ append class-vars :w append instance-data reduce [to set-word! :w :v] ] ] use class-vars compose/deep [ (instance-data) context [(class-methods)] ] ] | |
MichaelB 6-Jan-2006 [3158x2] | maybe a stupid question, but is this chapter out of that book http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0262220695/qid=1136588064/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/102-4260152-7911319?n=507846&s=books&v=glance ?? |
Another thing that would interest me, is how is the speed impact when using your above function, now even with closures - I mean the closure function copies everything on invocation and also make-instance itself binds everytime anew? | |
JaimeVargas 6-Jan-2006 [3160x3] | It is going to be slower, but not that bad. |
>> time-block [CounterClass/bump] 0.05 == 4.234619140625E-6 >> time-block [ctr1/bump] 0.05 == 1.17197799682617E-5 >> a: 4.234619140625E-6 == 4.234619140625E-6 >> b: 1.17197799682617E-5 == 1.17197799682617E-5 >> a / b == 0.361322409814242 >> b / a == 2.7676113433266 | |
It is slower because of binding | |
MichaelB 6-Jan-2006 [3163] | But not that much, given all the stuff that happends. |
Volker 6-Jan-2006 [3164x2] | do reduce [get in class (to lit-word! :w) (first :v)] -> do get in class (to lit-word! :w) (first :v) ; should work too |
either function! = type? v: get in class :w [ -> either function? v: get in class :w [ | |
JaimeVargas 6-Jan-2006 [3166x2] | Optimizations welcome ;-) |
It improved but not by much. | |
Henrik 7-Jan-2006 [3168x2] | ah the joys of BIND... >> a: make object! [b: 0 c: b] >> a/b == 0 >> a/c == 0 >> set in a 'b 7 == 7 >> a/c == 0 How do I restore the context? |
wait... that's not the problem | |
BrianH 7-Jan-2006 [3170x2] | The context is fine. When you do c: b you are setting c to the value of b (or rather a copy, since 0 is an immediate value). When you change the value of b the copy of the old value remains the same in c. |
Bind isn't used here. | |
Henrik 7-Jan-2006 [3172] | I realized that just now. the problem was entirely different. |
Robert 7-Jan-2006 [3173] | question concerning 'get: First, why doesn't get support something like "get my-object/user-data"? Next, how to get a path word? |
Henrik 7-Jan-2006 [3174] | path word? such as in my-object 'user-data ? |
Robert 8-Jan-2006 [3175] | Forget the last question... |
BrianH 12-Jan-2006 [3176] | Does the file execute setting of the secure native mean anything on Windows. What is it supposed to mean? |
Pekr 13-Jan-2006 [3177x4] | how to easily do base conversion? e.g. working with bitmasks, I want to be easily able to obtain e.g. 255, #FF, "11111111" |
... and convert between those ... | |
ah, probably enbase/base #{FF} 2 ..... I just wrongly tried with #FF ..... but then each char got converted separately ... | |
I also found Sunanda's 'base-convert.r script, so forget my question .... | |
Gregg 13-Jan-2006 [3181] | From RAMBO group: I don't know about "pretty " versus loadable, but what specific issue does it cause that you don't want that extra information available? WRT "form 1.0" |
older newer | first last |