At 03:53 PM 9/17/2001 +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
>On Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 11:01:32AM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > While I'm not fond of segfaults myself, the place to check isn't in the
> > interpreter loop.
>
>My view is that if you screw up writing assembly code, you should be
>thankful that you get the protection of a segfault.
I agree, but don't forget that if we're going to be allowing both Safe-ish
partitions and the execution of potentially untrusted code we need to guard
against jumps to naughty places by incoming bytecode.
Which, I suppose, argues as much for making the branch and jump code
guaranteed to vector through the opcode function table as anything, so we
can pay to check only in compartments we care about.
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
