[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: 1.99n status report
>>>>> "Mark" == Mark W Eichin <eichin@mit.edu> writes:
Mark> Sounds great... though this entry:
>> Ability for programs to detect that they are running under
>> Executor
Mark> kind of worries me. Is there any good reason for this
Mark> feature, or will it be configurable? I don't particularly
Mark> want a program to know it is running on anything special...
I can assure you that we don't have time to implement features that
don't have good reasons for their existence. The reason we're putting
in the ability of programs to detect when they're running under
Executor is so that eventually people can include native code for the
x86 in their program so that CPU intensive portions can run at native
speed. We're also putting in enough information so that programs that
write directly to the screen (something you can't do under
Executor/Linux/X-Windows, unless you use the horribly inefficient
"refresh" option) can chose not to in certain Executor configurations.
I hadn't thought of making it configurable, but that's a good point;
I'll think about it.
I'm guessing your concern is that people could conceivably write nasty
viruses that work specially under Executor. If so, I think the worry
is a bit overreaching, since anyone who is willing to go to that much
trouble can already do that. For instance, << way of determining that
you're running under Executor elided >>. It wouldn't take a rocket
scientist to find this or one of a dozen other ways to detect that an
application is running under Executor.
--Cliff
ctm@ardi.com
Follow-Ups:
References: