[cap-talk] An interesting sounding new language

[David Barbour]

On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 2:03 PM, Raoul Duke <raould at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> $0.02,
>
> > http://clojure.org/: Don't blame me if it's not.  I only read a summary.
>
> i don't think [clojure's STM] has anything important to explicitly
> contribute to security. [ . . . ]

I agree that clojure wasn't of particular interest in terms of
security, but STM in a capability-secure manner is of interest to me.
In particular, I mean /distributed/ STM, across different hosts, being
implemented in a manner that reveals no capabilities to the host that
initiated the transaction... this introduces some challenges for
tracking resources touched by a transaction - doubly so when dealing
with presences replicated for performance or redundancy (including
unum pattern in E).