In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Laurent Pointal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> .
>> .
>> .
> there's the security issue that really worries me. . . I have to be
> able to limit what the interpreter can execute. I can't have my
Cameron Laird a écrit :
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Laurent Pointal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Fred Bayer a écrit :
>>> Tony Belding wrote:
I'm interested in using an off-the-shelf interpreted language as a
user-accessible scripting language for a MUCK. I'm just not sure if I
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Laurent Pointal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Fred Bayer a écrit :
>>
>> Tony Belding wrote:
>>> I'm interested in using an off-the-shelf interpreted language as a
>>> user-accessible scripting language for a MUCK. I'm just not sure if I
.
Fred Bayer a écrit :
>
> Tony Belding wrote:
>> I'm interested in using an off-the-shelf interpreted language as a
>> user-accessible scripting language for a MUCK. I'm just not sure if I
>> can find one that does everything I need. The MUCK must be able to
>> call the interpreter and execute sc
Have you considered JavaScript Spidermonkey or JavaScript Rhino?
Sandboxing is automatic, and lots of people know the language already
(although fewer people are familiar with its dynamic object-oriented
capabilities).
Tony Belding wrote:
> I'm interested in using an off-the-shelf interpreted lang
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Tony Belding <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My final option would be to create my own language interpeter...
If you're capable of doing that, I'd have thought you'd be capable of
taking the source code for Regina and modifying it so that either no
commands are pas
Tony Belding skrev:
> I'm interested in using an off-the-shelf interpreted language as a
> user-accessible scripting language for a MUCK. I'm just not sure if I
> can find one that does everything I need. The MUCK must be able to
> call the interpreter and execute scripts with it, but the interp
Hi Tony,
Tony Belding wrote:
> I'm interested in using an off-the-shelf interpreted language as a
> user-accessible scripting language for a MUCK. I'm just not sure if I
> can find one that does everything I need. The MUCK must be able to call
> the interpreter and execute scripts with it, but t
Tony Belding wrote:
> I'm interested in using an off-the-shelf interpreted language as a
> user-accessible scripting language for a MUCK. I'm just not sure if I
> can find one that does everything I need. The MUCK must be able to call
> the interpreter and execute scripts with it, but the int
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Dennis Lee Bieber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 18:11:21 -0600, Tony Belding <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>declaimed the following in comp.lang.python:
>
>> the security issue that really worries me. . . I have to be able to
>> limit what the interpreter
Tony Belding wrote:
> Is this practical? I'm thinking of Ruby or Python for this, if they
> can meet the requirements.
Python had a sandbox module, but is was discarded because of security
problems.
If you want it working on MacOS, you may also have a look at Tcl, which has
a long tradition on
Tony Belding wrote:
> I'm interested in using an off-the-shelf interpreted language as a
> user-accessible scripting language for a MUCK. I'm just not sure if I
> can find one that does everything I need. The MUCK must be able to
> call the interpreter and execute scripts with it, but the interp
I'm interested in using an off-the-shelf interpreted language as a
user-accessible scripting language for a MUCK. I'm just not sure if I
can find one that does everything I need. The MUCK must be able to
call the interpreter and execute scripts with it, but the interpreter
must also be able t
13 matches
Mail list logo
