[cap-talk] Terminology and soap box

[David Hopwood]

Mark S. Miller wrote:
> Karp, Alan H wrote:
>>Ian G wrote:
>>
>>>Here's my soap box response:  capabilities is indistinguishable
>>>from the concepts (not the practice) of object orientation.
>>
>>I agree for object capabilities, but there are other possibilities,
> 
> I agree so far.
> 
>>e.g., c-lists.
> 
> Huh? All object-capability systems are c-list systems. (Though not all c-list 
> systems are object-capability systems.)

I think you're identifying "c-list systems" with partitioned capability
systems, while Alan is using a more restrictive understanding of
"c-list system", based on an implementation technique that is normally
used in capability operating systems.

Unlike the situation for languages, object-based concepts in operating
systems failed to make any significant headway at all -- rather than
just failing to go the last mile to become capability systems. Since there
are very much fewer successful operating systems than successful languages,
and since backward compatibility has had a much more stifling effect on
OS design, this is perhaps not surprising.

-- 
David Hopwood <david.nospam.hopwood at blueyonder.co.uk>