On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 7:39 PM, Benjamin Tolputt <[email protected] > wrote:
> I believe that resistance to this idea is based around the very valid > question of "Who is going to maintain this subset interpreter?". I understand this and is why I need to look and see just how simple it is to write a python interpreter in pypy. If pypy really is a "meta-circular interpreter" it should be a small amount of code to maintain. For example, a Scheme interpreter, written in Scheme is tiny. Most people probably think of how difficult it is to write a python interpreter in C and think it would be a ton of code but it could actually be very simple if written in PyPy. I won't say much more until I actually find the time to look at it though. On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 9:05 PM, Ruslan Merkulov <[email protected]> wrote: > I believe that security is 10% technical and 90% social problem, so > "web of trust" + educating users on security issues seems to be most > logical solution I totally agree with this. However, the 10% still needs to be done and I think that part of that 10% is at least declaring that rigs should not be able read files and connect to the internet unless the user really wants them to. That's my 2 cents :) _______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
