On Wed, Oct 19, 2005 at 02:48:05 +0200, Yuval Kogman wrote:
> the Serializable role, which is an interface spec jointly maintained
Err, I meant the Serializer role... The Serializable role is a role
that takes a delegate that does Serializer, and lets the object that
does it be frozen and thawed.
On Tue, Oct 18, 2005 at 21:43:57 +0200, Juerd wrote:
> > That was just a naive example - the words "Unsafe" and "Safe" are
> > user defined, and are chosen on a case by case basis in their app.
>
> I think there's a lot to be gained by implementing something like this
> globally, consistently. CPA
[snip]
Let me rephrase to see if I understand you - you like the fact that
boxed types + roles applied to those types + compile-time type
checking/inference allows you to tag a piece of information (int,
char, string, obj, whatever) with arbitrary metadata. Add that to the
fact that you can lexica
Yuval Kogman skribis 2005-10-18 21:22 (+0200):
> > I read the article before. What occurred to me then did so again now.
> > What exactly do Unsafe and Safe mean? Safe for *what*?
> That was just a naive example - the words "Unsafe" and "Safe" are
> user defined, and are chosen on a case by case ba
On Tue, Oct 18, 2005 at 21:04:02 +0200, Juerd wrote:
> Yuval Kogman skribis 2005-10-18 20:38 (+0200):
> > the function encode has the type Unsafe -> Safe
>
> I read the article before. What occurred to me then did so again now.
> What exactly do Unsafe and Safe mean? Safe for *what*?
That was
Yuval Kogman skribis 2005-10-18 20:38 (+0200):
> the function encode has the type Unsafe -> Safe
I read the article before. What occurred to me then did so again now.
What exactly do Unsafe and Safe mean? Safe for *what*?
Something that is safe to put in HTML may be unsafe to put in an rfc8
