On Wed, 2006-05-17 at 22:41 +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: > At Tue, 16 May 2006 00:05:24 +0200, > Pierre THIERRY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Could you also tell me what you think about the link between > > virtualization and constructor, in the light of my proposal on this > > issue? Do you still think, if constructor is implemented the way I > > describe it, that they are incompatible (and I agree with you that > > virutalization is indeed a very important feature, for many reasons)? > > As far as I understood your proposal, the disclose flag needed to be > set voluntarily by the creator of the constructor. That does not > satisfy my concerns. Marcus: The discussion of the disclose flag has no bearing on virtualizability. The object is virtualizable or it is not. Whether it is technically feasible to front-end the object has absolutely nothing to do with whether its implementation is disclosed. I understand that you want disclosure to be involuntary. However, we should not become confused between ideological requirements and functional requirements. Jonathan _______________________________________________ L4-hurd mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/l4-hurd
