diff options
author | Kartik K. Agaram <vc@akkartik.com> | 2017-09-11 06:48:32 -0700 |
---|---|---|
committer | Kartik K. Agaram <vc@akkartik.com> | 2017-09-13 20:31:52 -0700 |
commit | dcaecff513dc48fe4d997da7d6c6a2d96701fb6e (patch) | |
tree | 5774f30574736752c38580737087a31e113c1292 /html/resources.mu | |
parent | 3e3383e782d2c1ef30d0f9aa324dc32f55452b55 (diff) | |
download | mu-dcaecff513dc48fe4d997da7d6c6a2d96701fb6e.tar.gz |
3993
Fully isolate routines from their arguments. I still need exceptions for containers that are *designed* to be shared between routines. The primary such case is channels; we need some way to share them between routines, and if we deep-copy them that defeats their entire purpose. A milder case is the use of fake file-systems in tests, though that's a hint that there'll be more of these as the OS gets more fleshed out. The pattern seems to be that we need to not deep-copy containers that contain lock fields, and so their operations internally do their own locking. We may have to stop hard-coding the list of exceptions and allow people to define new ones. Perhaps don't deep-copy any container with metadata of 'shared', and then ensure that get-location is only ever called on shared containers. This still isn't absolutely ironclad. People can now store something into a channel and then pass it into a routine to share arbitrary data. But perhaps the goal isn't to be ironclad, just to avoid easy mistakes. I'd still want an automated check for this, though. Some way to highlight it as an unsafe pattern. This completes step 1 in the plan of commit 3992 for making continuations safe.
Diffstat (limited to 'html/resources.mu')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions