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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,29d8139471e3f53e
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.datemas.de!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Securing type extensions
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 18:23:42 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <m2wrqplfq9.fsf@pushface.org>
References: <87iq2bfenl.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de>
	<874odv9npv.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org> <87y6b7cedd.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de>
	<66a3704c-54f9-4f04-8860-aa12f516134b@t3g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>
	<87d3sib44t.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de>
	<134q4k2ly2pf4$.17nlv1q6q5ivo.dlg@40tude.net>
	<4c8dec8e$0$6990$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net>
	<epkb3s8dfxk0$.1qdvo5vg2fsgh.dlg@40tude.net>
	<4c8e3f44$0$6769$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Injection-Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 17:23:42 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx03.eternal-september.org;
 posting-host="KCXegvZb5vh43D+f3BR6Ew";
	logging-data="18224"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18Z0mZVUU5kAKWbH4asUTvSAZDYfdlxMsQ="
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (darwin)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:0qN3WIspcHho+qToQvJ1fD7UPCg=
	sha1:d9MNH3plDliEo+Q4HmfX0T31Q24=
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:14046
Date: 2010-09-13T18:23:42+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Georg Bauhaus <rm.dash-bauhaus@futureapps.de> writes:

> On 13.09.10 11:42, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
>
>>> If a system must reflect trust and mistrust, shouldn't the
>>> mechanics of a language support both?
>> 
>> In Ada it is called visibility.
>
> An event driven parser (or GUI) as an example: the gears of
> the parser (or event loop) interact with the prim ops of
> a user defined type.  The type will have been derived from
> some abstract type that I provided.
>
> How will Ada's visibility rules help me trust the ops?

I don't see why this would be a problem for _you_? (unless you're
worried about the support calls you might get!)