[e-lang] A broken brand?
naasking at higherlogics.com
Wed Mar 5 14:01:45 EST 2008
David Wagner wrote:
> Sandro writes:
>> MarkM clarified in a follow-up: types wouldn't have helped if you want
>> to retain transparent intermediation.
> Ahh, my apologies for missing that. Can you explain why we'd want
> transparent intermediation? Are we talking about the membrane pattern,
> or something like that?
Unless I'm mistaken, this is a problem for sealers, which have many uses
that cross machine boundaries.
I should amend my original statement to: types wouldn't help if you want
to retain intermediation given currently popular statically typed
languages. There are prototypes for statically typed distributed
languages, like HashCaml , and Alice ML  which maintain type
safety across machine boundaries.
Types don't mean much in a distributed application where the runtimes
can't trust each other, not if the runtime hasn't been built with this
use in mind. Distributed typing based on secrets can probably enforce
the necessary invariants.
More information about the e-lang