[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       majordomo-workers
Subject:    Re: Taboo question
From:       Jason L Tibbitts III <tibbs () hpc ! uh ! edu>
Date:       1998-01-31 18:57:15
[Download RAW message or body]

>>>>> "BLH" == Brian L Heess <dmbong@commline.com> writes:

BLH> Tom and Jason, I just want to voice my opinion that both of Tom's
BLH> examples were AWESOME!!!  :)

Ummm, OK.  I don't see what you're saying here.  Is the mechanism that's
currently implemented in 2.0 not enough, or am I missing something?

Look, that scheme just won't work because it's hard to make secure and
impossible to reduce to a single scan of the message.  (Plus I think it's
even more difficult to understand than what's there now, and I'm agonizing
over how to document _that_.)  Please try to comment on what is there in
the code today.  It does most of those things in a way that makes it secure
and in a way that can be made fast.  If it's not enough then we can talk
about extending it, but I think it's counterproductive to ignore the
current implementation completely.

 - J<

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]