On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 1:36 PM, Jonathan S. Shapiro <[email protected]>wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 1:27 PM, David Jeske <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I'm tempted to add: >> > >> NoGlobals - does not depend on any static module global region/BSS -- is >> this the same as NoDetect? >> > > Not quite. The only reason to preclude dependence on globals is isolation. > It is sufficient to preclude dependence on *mutable* globals. If *nobody* can > mutate a global, then that global is for all intents and purposes a > literal, and there's no real reason to be concerned about it. > Sorry. I wasn't clear enough. NoDetect is an approximation to the "globals must be deep-constant" rule of E. What it says is that *reachable* globals were deep-constant. If a tree falls in the forest, and we know you couldn't hear it... shap
_______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
