Re: lisp and security
From: Erann Gat (gNOSPAMat_at_jpl.nasa.gov)
Date: 02/25/04
- Next message: Russell Wallace: "Re: [OT] event horizons Re: Advantages of Lisp?"
- Previous message: Pascal Bourguignon: "Re: rational arithmetic library?"
- In reply to: Barry Margolin: "Re: lisp and security"
- Next in thread: Barry Margolin: "Re: lisp and security"
- Reply: Barry Margolin: "Re: lisp and security"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 23:18:27 -0800
In article <barmar-E5B54B.00092825022004@comcast.ash.giganews.com>, Barry
Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> In article <gNOSPAMat-2402041623410001@k-137-79-50-101.jpl.nasa.gov>,
> gNOSPAMat@jpl.nasa.gov (Erann Gat) wrote:
>
> > > And how this differs from someone blindly using the DOM model of
XML, which
> > > essentially sucks in the entire tree into memory, thereby risking
the exact
> > > same problem, eludes me.
> >
> > It doesn't. Just because other approaches may encounter the same problem
> > doesn't mean it's not a problem.
>
> Go back to the original post. The problem was raised in a discussion
> about using Lisp S-Expressions versus XML, and the claim was that this
> is one of the reasons not to use Lisp. If both approaches share a
> security failing, then it's irrelevant in the comparison.
To paraphrase Will, how this differs from what I said eludes me.
E.
- Next message: Russell Wallace: "Re: [OT] event horizons Re: Advantages of Lisp?"
- Previous message: Pascal Bourguignon: "Re: rational arithmetic library?"
- In reply to: Barry Margolin: "Re: lisp and security"
- Next in thread: Barry Margolin: "Re: lisp and security"
- Reply: Barry Margolin: "Re: lisp and security"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|