From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD,
	FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,af0c6ea85f3ed92d
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Received: by 10.68.213.68 with SMTP id nq4mr5277028pbc.2.1328940663212;
        Fri, 10 Feb 2012 22:11:03 -0800 (PST)
Path: 
 wr5ni11282pbc.0!nntp.google.com!news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!vd8g2000pbc.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Rob Shea <zzycatch@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Arbitrary Sandbox
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2012 22:11:02 -0800 (PST)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: 
 <4da4bf75-e6c9-4c17-9072-ab6f533ed93f@vd8g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>
References: <bfeb9869-9323-4ad5-bdf8-af20593734ef@q8g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>
 <2aaee0a4-e820-4a75-bbaf-d9d09c366d2c@f5g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 114.76.94.142
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1328940663 20887 127.0.0.1 (11 Feb 2012 06:11:03
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2012 06:11:03 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: vd8g2000pbc.googlegroups.com; posting-host=114.76.94.142;
 posting-account=3Ly23AoAAABzcQBzLiIXe1WPOFNRSfDG
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-Google-Web-Client: true
X-Google-Header-Order: HUALENKRC
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
 rv:10.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/10.0,gzip(gfe)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: 2012-02-10T22:11:02-08:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Is this true? I've seen it mentioned one other place but it was just
from another individual... most places imply otherwise.

As for the other posts about virtualization, unfortunately I am only
able to discuss a small portion of the project, I appreciate the
efforts to solve my problem, but at this point I am just looking to be
better intellectually armed for a big meeting about this and as I
said, I feel I'm under educated on the choices and the proponents of
each have political motives so I may be getting less than absolute
honest from my team.

If anyone is able to address my concerns about Ada on embedded systems
is awesome, but Ada on the abstraction of Windows, relying on the
APIs, etc... is this still awesome?

Thank you.

On Feb 10, 10:48=A0pm, Ludovic Brenta <ludo...@ludovic-brenta.org>
wrote:
>
> IIUC, your sandbox cannot be a .NET application, or it will not be
> able to run "arbitrary code" because it will be restricted to running
> only .NET bytecode inside the .NET virtual machine. =A0If that is
> correct and if C# can only be compiled to .NET and can only run in
> the .NET virtual machine, then C# is ruled out. =A0If you want to run
> "arbitrary code", you must run outside the .NET virtual machine
> (possibly running a .NET virtual machine _inside_ your sandbox).
>
> --
> Ludovic Brenta.