On Mon, 2005-10-24 at 16:41 +0200, Bernhard Kauer wrote: > On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 02:21:39PM +0100, Neal H. Walfield wrote: > > Jonathan recently outlined how constructors functions in [1] and I > > think he answers your question there. > > Perhaps I should refine my question: What are the guarantees of the > constructor I can not achieve without a COPY? > > I took a look at the description of constructors (thanks for the references!) > but I did not found the requirement for a COPY there.
Bernhard is correct. REVOCABLE COPY is not an impediment to confinement w.r.t. the constructor. It is an impediment to robustness, which is a discussion that we have already had. I did not think my statement through carefully enough. shap _______________________________________________ L4-hurd mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/l4-hurd
