a future caller alternative ?

Domenic Denicola domenic at domenicdenicola.com
Mon Mar 11 18:48:40 PDT 2013

From: Andrea Giammarchi

> if I do not return that function explicitly and since I own that function being the one that put a `caller` inside it where is exactly the problem ... once again?

> If I've passed that object I could also argue that object should not be modified until I decide. There's no mechanism to drop a temporarily frozen state because I've sent the object I trust to another function.

> I've created that bloody pie, who better than me can decide or suggest when and how to use it?

> If you call unknown functions inside your code, the fact there is a caller is actually the last problem you might have, isn't it?

In general, Andrea, I think you'd be well-served to read up on the OCAP resources that Mark Miller linked to a few replies ago:


You do seem to be missing some fundamental principles of OCAP, as exemplified by lines like those quoted above. It's really hurting how you're perceived on this list, because you are just forging ahead with your objections and agenda without doing the necessary background reading to understand the setting in which your questions need to be framed. Even if you object to OCAP in principle, you clearly haven't spent much time looking into it, so it's hard to take your objections seriously.

I realize you're probably busy and reading those articles and watching those videos will consume a decent amount of your time, but, well, you're consuming the time of a lot of people on this list. We're all well-intentioned here and are generally happy to spend our time guiding you toward understanding, but there's only so much exposition we can do on such a broad subject. It will be a much more productive dialogue once you ground yourself in the basic concepts underlying ECMAScript's chosen security model, and we can discuss from that foundation.


More information about the es-discuss mailing list