[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: Bytecode: Safe or not? / luac manual
- From: Stefan Reich <stefan.reich.maker.of.eye@...>
- Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 13:59:06 +0000
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 1:50 PM, steve donovan <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 3:42 PM, Stefan Reich
> <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> Sorry, but what does this have to do with anything discussed before?
> But it is relevant; in theory it is impossible to tell whether a
> foreign script will ever finish executing. Hence the need for
> time-outs and memory limits, etc.
Yes, there is a need for that. We just implement those limits - as
long as computers are finite creatures, there are limits anyway.
> Personally I feel that it's best to pass code as text, rather than bytecode.
Yeah, I'd love to do that. Easier and more readable. But I also want
running scripts to migrate between machines (with no programming
overhead) - and that only seems to work with serialized bytecode at
We start with source code in step 1 though (when new scripts are run)
- from steps 2 on (script migration) we transfer Pluto images.
> You will also need a clever security model so some trusted scripts can
> actually do something on the machines they run on.
They can already compute anything that can be computed. Local
interaction is an additional benefit that we can add gradually. Yes,
security comes into play there. It's a new field for intelligent