> Why don't add a configuration option to make Rivet using safe interpreters?
David and I discussed it back in the day when Rivet first started, but creating an interpreter (especially a safe one) on every request was WAY more expensive than creating a namespace for each request, and most people don't need the protection of multiple interpreters. We thought about adding it in at one point for things like hosting companies (the same reason NeoSoft did it back in the day), but it ultimately wasn't worth it, and no one was asking. AOLServer creates a new interpreter for every request, but it also has a sophisticated pooling mechanism for creating a pool of Tcl interps and then keeping them around until there's a request to fill. They also wrote some nice code for essentially cloning an interp to another, so they can setup a master interp and then quickly clone as many copies as they needed to serve requests. As I said, all this could be done in Rivet, but what is the pay off? No one really needs such a feature. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
