At Fri, 15 Apr 2011 02:37:19 -0400, Eli Barzilay wrote: > More than a week ago, ry...@racket-lang.org wrote: > > a19a034 Ryan Culpepper <ry...@racket-lang.org> 2011-04-04 15:14 > > : > > | added ffi/unsafe/security > > : > > A collects/ffi/unsafe/security.rkt > > `ffi/unsafe' should be for things that are not safe, so it looks like > this should be elsewhere.
I agree, and `ffi/security' or `ffi/file' seems like the right library name. > (And looking at the functionality, it looks > like it's better to get rid of the ffi types which are easily done > with `security-guard-check-file', and move it to a different > collection -- maybe `racket/path'?) I don't agree. Calling `security-guard-check-file' shouldn't be necessary in code that doesn't use the FFI, because suitable security checks should be built into a safe operation. And the `_file/guard', `_file/r', and `_file/rw' derived FFI types seem clearly useful. _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev
