[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > The second problem that must be solved at the Lilypond level has to do > > with safe mode. Apparently safe mode is presently "very safe", in fact > > so safe that some reasonable scheme tricks do not work--probably not all > > stuff in input/test will compile. > > > > It would be very useful if we could have a safe-but-not-so-safe mode, > > say where the only thing that can't be done is starting external > > commands and read/write files, much like the default policy with Java > > applets. > > Unfortunately, that's not possible. GUILE's safe mode revolves around > namespace trickery to hide 'unsafe' commands. Unfortunately, LilyPond > scoping also uses namespace trickery, and I don't see how I can > mix both things flawlessly.
Mind you - I'm contemplating to switch over to MzScheme, which does have such safe-but-not-so-safe operation modes, but that is a major task, which will not be finished any time soon. -- Han-Wen Nienhuys | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
