This is the mail archive of the guile@cygnus.com mailing list for the guile project.
| Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
|---|---|---|
| Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Matthew Crosby <crosby@nago.cs.colorado.edu> writes: > Hmm. Security, good point. For what I'm doing at the moment, security > isn't an issue. > But that does interest me. Is there an eqivalent of, say, safe tcl? Any > interest or plans? (I'd volunteer to work on it, if there is interest...) It has been discussed. It's an issue for the module system. There's no reason one shouldn't be able to run code in a restricted RnRS namespace, which should prevent one from doing anything unfortunate. (I just watched Hackers last night --- it was so 3L337!!!1!! Very amusing. I don't know how a non-computer type would enjoy the movie.) Anyway, that namespace restriction should be enough to keep things safe. The big reason we don't have "safe-guile" is because nobody's put together a basic module listing all the names one needs to get something done in scheme, while not listing anything hazardous. Oh, and the module system might change. It's worth doing, though. Andrew