[cap-talk] Worst-case object-capability language retrofitting

[David-Sarah Hopwood]

Mark Miller wrote:
> Actually, I just remembered another that you mentioned earlier in this
> thread: legacy compatibility / retrofit effort. Each substrate will have its
> own unique legacy with its own unique problems. Having spent more than a
> year now on perhaps the worst case for an achievable language retrofit --
> JavaScript -- I have learned not to underestimate the pervasive effect it
> has on other design decisions.

Actually, I think C might be achievable. If so, that would certainly be a
worse case than JavaScript. While C is normally considered to be, and
implemented as, a memory-unsafe language, there are already memory-safe
implementations of it (e.g. Fail-Safe C
<https://staff.aist.go.jp/y.oiwa/FailSafeC/index-en.html>), and it would
be interesting to try to make one of those capability-secure.

-- 
David-Sarah Hopwood