On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 4:57 PM, Matt Oliveri <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 6:10 PM, Jonathan S. Shapiro <[email protected]> > wrote: > > The reason you want other options is so you can do things like the > > sealer/unseal pattern. > > You're saying BitC wouldn't have any other practical rights > amplification technique (with which to implement seals) without this > addition? Yes. The "seal" operation, in its essence, is existential encapsulation. The unseal operation, in its essence, is existential open. The subtle difference between unseal and existential open is that unseal requires an additional parameter demonstrating proof of authority. This notion of "guarded existential open" is very powerful, and nearly free from a language design perspective. But getting back to your question, my intention is that interfaces will be the only mechanism of existential encapsulation. shap
_______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
