Hmmm...got any other links?

IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO

1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User

Welcome to IWETHEY!

Post #18,425

by tseliot

11/15/01 12:56:31 PM

Hmmm...got any other links?

I've done some looking into this topic for my own apps, but it seems prohibitively difficult to try implementing this without OS support for it built in. Any app-level links?

---------------------------------
A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly by the chain of their own ideas;...despair and time eat away the bonds of iron and steel, but they are powerless against the habitual union of ideas, they can only tighten it still more; and on the soft fibres of the brain is founded the unshakable base of the soundest of Empires."

Jacques Servan, 1767

Post #18,885

by ben_tilly

11/19/01 9:05:38 PM

Sorry...

I have seen application-specific links, but they tend to be to dead projects, etc.

By and large it seems that if you want to use this strategy in building an application, it seems to work fairly nicely. (I have done it on a small scale, and was happy.) But you wind up having to build a certain amount of infrastructure, and there don't seem to be a lot of available components structured in this way.

So it is a design idea that I think is useful, even without OS/language support. But I don't have any good links on that.

Cheers,
Ben

J2EE vs. Microsoft.NET - (cforde) - (28) - Nov. 14, 2001, 07:10:32 PM EST

Security is simple either via net or java - (boxley) - (4) - Nov. 15, 2001, 12:02:44 AM EST

That is a procedural model of security - (ben_tilly) - (3) - Nov. 15, 2001, 08:40:44 AM EST

Actually J2EE uses a declarative model - (bluke) - Nov. 15, 2001, 10:57:49 AM EST

Hmmm...got any other links? - (tseliot) - (1) - Nov. 15, 2001, 12:56:31 PM EST

Sorry... - (ben_tilly) - Nov. 19, 2001, 09:05:38 PM EST

.NET replays the ActiveX fiasco - (neelk) - (22) - Nov. 15, 2001, 02:37:12 PM EST

Side note. - (inthane-chan) - (7) - Nov. 15, 2001, 02:48:31 PM EST

Muah. - (admin) - (2) - Nov. 15, 2001, 03:10:53 PM EST

Moi, for one. -NT - (CRConrad) - Nov. 15, 2001, 04:57:41 PM EST

Is most amusing. -NT - (static) - Nov. 15, 2001, 11:56:24 PM EST

I don't get it... - (neelk) - (3) - Nov. 16, 2001, 09:54:41 AM EST

I don't get it either. - (inthane-chan) - Nov. 16, 2001, 11:33:48 AM EST

Kitchen sink... - (ChrisR) - Nov. 16, 2001, 12:26:49 PM EST

I bet it's issues with the Virtual Machine. - (static) - Nov. 16, 2001, 11:42:41 PM EST

Re: .NET replays the ActiveX fiasco - (Squidley) - (13) - Nov. 19, 2001, 02:40:09 PM EST

Interesting list - (ChrisR) - (7) - Nov. 19, 2001, 03:00:55 PM EST

Oh, so it was YOU! - (CRConrad) - (2) - Nov. 19, 2001, 03:26:01 PM EST

rephrasing? - (ChrisR) - (1) - Nov. 19, 2001, 04:04:06 PM EST

I take it you *do* know what I'm referring to - (CRConrad) - Nov. 20, 2001, 12:04:39 PM EST

Re: Interesting list - (Squidley) - (3) - Nov. 19, 2001, 07:17:48 PM EST

Viruses and verified security holes - (ben_tilly) - (2) - Nov. 19, 2001, 08:54:10 PM EST

Re: Viruses and verified security holes - (Squidley) - (1) - Nov. 20, 2001, 10:28:39 AM EST

ActiveX is actually one thing... - (Arkadiy) - Nov. 21, 2001, 11:38:25 AM EST

Re: .NET replays the ActiveX fiasco - (neelk) - (3) - Nov. 19, 2001, 06:09:49 PM EST

EzBug hangover? - (pwhysall) - (1) - Nov. 20, 2001, 02:13:02 AM EST

Finger habits are hard to break. :) -NT - (neelk) - Nov. 20, 2001, 09:46:41 AM EST

typo fix - (neelk) - Nov. 20, 2001, 09:03:04 AM EST

Re: .NET replays the ActiveX fiasco - (pwhysall) - Nov. 20, 2001, 02:14:46 AM EST

iwethey.org

It is a silly place.
233 ms