This perspective suggests a gap in the design in some sense, I would
say. The PL construct cannot, on its own, guarantee that the values
from #:authentic structs end up behaving like those kinds of values.

(also: threads and regexps don't seem problematic from the contract
perspective, but ports do, since they are a communication channel and
the others aren't.)

Robby


On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 7:52 AM, Matthew Flatt <[email protected]> wrote:
> I think a better analogy is to values like #<thread>, #<input-port>, or
> #<regexp>. Although those kinds of values are implemented with structs,
> the accessor and mutator functions are not exported (and, as Scott
> says, there's no way to get the accessors and mutations by reflection),
> so there's no way to impersonate the values. In general, it's up to the
> implementation of a new kind of value to supply impersonator/chaperone
> support for those values, and implementations usually don't.
>
> At Thu, 11 May 2017 19:00:43 -0400, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>>
>> Oh right.
>>
>>
>> > On May 11, 2017, at 6:54 PM, Robby Findler <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > They would be the same. We currently cannot chaperone or impersonate cons
>> cells. We copy them.
>> >
>> > Robby
>> >
>> > On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 5:51 PM Matthias Felleisen <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Yes except that you can contract cons cells. So why couldn’t you contract
>> authentic structs then?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > > On May 11, 2017, at 6:41 PM, Robby Findler <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Indeed: if we did that, then these structs would be much like cons
>> > > cells currently are.
>> > >
>> > > Robby
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 5:39 PM, Robby Findler
>> > > <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > >> What if #:authentic (or whatever) were only allowed on immutable
>> > >> objects and we allowed them to be copied? Then contracts could protect
>> > >> them.
>> > >>
>> > >> Robby
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 5:38 PM, Matthias Felleisen
>> > >> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > >>>
>> > >>> @ Christos
>> > >>>
>> > >>> #:authentic explicitly introduces a channel of communication that it is
>> not protectable by contracts. This makes Racket’s contract system explicitly
>> incomplete. It might have been incomplete in the past for other reasons.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> If the name isn’t fixed, #:no-proxy-allowed would be my preference.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> — Matthias
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>> On May 11, 2017, at 12:48 PM, Scott Moore <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>> I agree that generally don't want performance declarations that
>> > >>>>> interfere with reasonable interposition. The good uses of 
>> > >>>>> `#:authentic`
>> > >>>>> would be in places where the struct representation of a value is not
>> > >>>>> exposed or where the values themselves are not exposed (so any
>> > >>>>> interposition means being on the "inside" where you can change the
>> > >>>>> code, anyway).
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> Yes, I agree with this. I think as far as how this changes Racket’s
>> data abstraction model, the key is “where the values themselves are not
>> exposed.”
>> > >>>> #:authentic only has an interesting effect in the other case, where
>> “outside” code gets its hands on a value of the struct type. Previously, I
>> could write a program that used inspectors to impersonate this value
>> regardless of the “inside” code’s intent. Now that would no longer be 
>> possible.
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> I doubt there is much code that currently relies on being able to do
>> this and so I would say go ahead. (Perhaps DrRacket or other debugging 
>> tools?)
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> On the other hand, Spencer already asked if this would be something 
>> > >>>> the
>> optimization coach would recommend. I think it would be important for the
>> documentation of #:authentic or the implementation of such a coach to stress
>> the importance of the rules of thumb you just laid out.
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> --
>> > >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> Groups "Racket Developers" group.
>> > >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>> an email to [email protected].
>> > >>>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>> > >>>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-dev/3c430798-e93a-4900-8215-198f77d9b9
>> 91%40Spark.
>> > >>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> --
>> > >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> Groups "Racket Developers" group.
>> > >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>> an email to [email protected].
>> > >>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>> > >>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-dev/D688771A-C477-40D8-B209-D9506362C5
>> CB%40ccs.neu.edu.
>> > >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>> >
>> > --
>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Racket Developers" group.
>> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to [email protected].
>> > To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>> > To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-dev/1AFE0571-C48C-4B22-B445-D96B283C68
>> 85%40ccs.neu.edu.
>> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Racket Developers" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to [email protected].
>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-dev/77B4F4BC-74B9-4838-AFC1-B65BCF8BE6
>> 95%40ccs.neu.edu.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Racket Developers" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to [email protected].
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-dev/5915b006.5639620a.b51d4.83dcSMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING%40gmr-mx.google.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Racket Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-dev/CAL3TdOPTT8-8CuJt86VE-_z%3DnZ%2B-Hxf92HyNW%3DvUtiVy9-5yAg%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to