I tend to agree though there is some information flowing from a thread to its 
context (thread CML events). I have to think whether this is a channel of 
communication. 




> On May 12, 2017, at 8:57 AM, Robby Findler <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> 
> 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.

-- 
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/752ED434-8FB1-4F9A-89C2-153070098FF8%40ccs.neu.edu.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to