On 2 March 2015 at 08:57, Matt Rice <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 12:34 AM, Keean Schupke <[email protected]> wrote: > > Yes I think it can be done using tuple types and tagged unions and I > posted > > an example. > > > > All it relied on was consistent memory layout for records and tagged > unions. > > > > You just have a record that has the common data in a header section, and > the > > tagged union of records in a body section. There's a reason its called an > > 'object header' right? > > I think where we differ here is subtle in that a tagged union can only > support a single type in this mechanism, and a RW key in the header, > and a RO key in the header can trigger the RW key to have both read > and write types, and you are saying that they must be represented by > different types in the tagged union, one which subsumes the other.
I am not sure I understand the details of this. Types don't restrict machine code access to data, so the kernel must marshall all read/write requests to this region (IE must be in kernel not user address space). You might need to go into a bit greater detail. Keean.
_______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
