Re: Ramblings on "base class" for SV etc.

[Dan Sugalski]

At 10:47 PM 8/12/00 -0400, Chaim Frenkel wrote:
> >>>>> "DS" == Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> Er, you still have to think about whether something could be tied and
> >> tainted at the same time.
>
>DS> Yeah, that's an issue. We need to hammer out how much is the 
>responsibility
>DS> of the vtable functions, and how much is the responsibility of the op
>DS> functions.
>
>DS> Looks like "tainted" qualifies as the first flag bit in the global flags
>DS> field...
>
>Just a thought.
>
>Have a tainted and untainted vtbl.

I'm not sure the vtable's the place for this sort of thing. (Plus then we 
start getting a zillion alternate functions--we'd have taint/notaint and 
thread/nothread right now for four, add another and that brings us to 
eight, then sixteen, then...) Besides, generally the code would want to 
check taint status before accessing the data.

                                        Dan

--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski                          even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED]                         have teddy bears and even
                                      teddy bears get drunk