If *you* are the wiseguy, then Smalltalk is a pretty powerful internal DSL:)
Dale On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 9:09 AM, Dale Henrichs < dale.henri...@gemtalksystems.com> wrote: > If you are allowing arbitrary Smalltalk to be shipped in via HTTP, then I > would worry about some wiseguy writing malicious code in the block ... > > Dale > > > On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Norbert Hartl <norb...@hartl.name> wrote: > >> I was looking for a solution where I can have a textual grammar for a DSL >> in order to specify filters on objects. I didn't really search the net >> because I know a cute little DSL for that already. It is called smalltalk, >> you might have heard of it. >> >> So what I do is putting the filter spec into the image via an http >> interface, materialize the filter in image and store it in a database to >> have them survive image restart. A filter spec could look like this >> >> [ :value | ( self sectionLabelOf: value ) = 'device' ] >> >> I want to know if there is any trouble to expect if I'm using plain block >> syntax for that task. As the blocks are injected using an http interface >> there is no environment/context problem. I would have some helper class as >> a facade to ease the filtering let's call it >> >> FilterHelper (would have a class side method #sectionLabelOf:) >> >> So getting the block code via HTTP I could do >> >> block := Smalltalk compiler >> evaluate: request contents >> for: FilterHelper >> logged: false >> >> And I would serialize it into a database as a string again doing >> >> self store: block sourceNode formattedCode >> >> Are there any possible drawbacks using it this way? >> >> thanks, >> >> Norbert >> >> >> >
