Talk:Object capability
From Erights
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
[[User:Kosik|Kosik]] 15:17, 10 July 2009 (CDT) | [[User:Kosik|Kosik]] 15:17, 10 July 2009 (CDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ''I have read Mark Miller's thesis, many years ago. And I played with '''E language''' then, too. I've gained more than a few inspirations from these, but I'm not all that fond of the language (in particular, how it handles distribution, disruption, resilience, persistence, concurrency, consistency, facets, and I'm not impressed with available optimizations achievable).'' | ||
| + | |||
| + | ''Anyhow, I can only express my professional opinion on what [[object capability]] means, same as Mark Miller or anyone else, and take comfort in the fact that formal definitions are graded by '''utility in making distinctions''' rather than by their conformance with the opinions of others. You ask if I'm "sure"? I'm very certain of the utility in understanding [[object capability]] as distinct from other capabilities, and I'm very certain of the utility in understanding [[capability]] as distinct from '''secure''' capability, such that one can meaningfully discusss the security '''of''' capabilities rather than just security '''with''' capabilities'''. So, in that sense, I'm sure.'' [[User:Dmbarbour|Dmbarbour]] 16:15, 10 July 2009 (CDT) | ||
Revision as of 21:15, 10 July 2009
Are you sure, Dmbarbour?
May I suggest you
- first to read Mark Miller's thesis
- then install E
- read E in a Walnut and experiment with E
If you like it, join e-lang or cap-talk mailing list and discuss your ideas.
Kosik 15:17, 10 July 2009 (CDT)
I have read Mark Miller's thesis, many years ago. And I played with E language then, too. I've gained more than a few inspirations from these, but I'm not all that fond of the language (in particular, how it handles distribution, disruption, resilience, persistence, concurrency, consistency, facets, and I'm not impressed with available optimizations achievable).
Anyhow, I can only express my professional opinion on what object capability means, same as Mark Miller or anyone else, and take comfort in the fact that formal definitions are graded by utility in making distinctions rather than by their conformance with the opinions of others. You ask if I'm "sure"? I'm very certain of the utility in understanding object capability as distinct from other capabilities, and I'm very certain of the utility in understanding capability as distinct from secure capability, such that one can meaningfully discusss the security of capabilities rather than just security with capabilities. So, in that sense, I'm sure. Dmbarbour 16:15, 10 July 2009 (CDT)
