On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 3:43 PM, Charles Oliver Nutter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Greg Brown wrote: >>> Is there a way to run Groovy so that it would not need to be signed? >> >> I think this is the key question. The idea that apps can be written for the >> Java Plugin using any JVM scripting language is very compelling; somewhat >> less so if the code needs to be signed in order for it to work. >> >> Ken, can you offer any insight here? > > I guess the key problem is being able to generate and load arbitrary > code. In JRuby, that would happen in JIT mode and if methods are bound > using generated stubs/invokers. But we also can just run interpreted and > use reflection, which I think gets around the security issues. It > seems like Groovy could do the same by precompiling, unless there's some > additional code generation at runtime even when all code is precompiled. > > It seems like CLR/DLR/Silverlight would have to support code generation > to allow IronRuby and IronPython to run. Assuming that's the case, why > is their security model more permissive about this kind of thing than > the Java plugin's?
Are the problems in applets related to reflection or to creating custom classloaders to load and cache newly-created bytecode, or ? What calls are bouncing off the walls of the sandbox? Patrick --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "JVM Languages" group. To post to this group, send email to jvm-languages@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jvm-languages?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
