------=_Part_579_8864936.1366462198585
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

LEWG accepted that the paper addressed a real problem, and that the
proposed solution had real benefits over existing solutions. However, they
had a couple of concerns about this paper.

   - Security- the proposal involves dealing with executable memory, which
   can be a security risk if not properly vetted. As far as I understand them,
   the security concerns raised by Google can be addressed, but any future
   revision of this paper will have to include security considerations, and
   probably involve being vetted by Google's security experts. The primary
   thing to show is that the implementation does not have to mark memory as
   *simultaneously* writable *and* executable.
   - Precedent- there have been no previous papers dealing with run-time
   code generation, even in a form as simple as this, so there is no precedent
   for accepting a paper along this line. Some systems like iOS have very
   heavy, if not total, restrictions on executable memory. Whether or not to
   accept a proposal for such a feature is not an issue the Committee has
   previously dealt with.
   - The paper did not adequately show that there was no requirement for
   language or compiler support for implementation. The wording was not
   sufficiently clear to show that

In addition, the paper did not correctly constrain the constructor,
similarly to std::function.

Whether or not a revised paper will pass Committee has yet to be seen, but
first, there must be a sample implementation which passes the security
concerns. This should address most of the issues with the paper.

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/?hl=en.



------=_Part_579_8864936.1366462198585
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

LEWG accepted that the paper addressed a real problem, and that the propose=
d solution had real benefits over existing solutions. However, they had a c=
ouple of concerns about this paper.&nbsp;<div><ul><li>Security- the proposa=
l involves dealing with executable memory, which can be a security risk if =
not properly vetted. As far as I understand them, the security concerns rai=
sed by Google can be addressed, but any future revision of this paper will =
have to include security considerations, and probably involve being vetted =
by Google's security experts. The primary thing to show is that the impleme=
ntation does not have to mark memory as <i>simultaneously</i>&nbsp;writable=
 <i>and</i>&nbsp;executable.</li><li>Precedent- there have been no previous=
 papers dealing with run-time code generation, even in a form as simple as =
this, so there is no precedent for accepting a paper along this line. Some =
systems like iOS have very heavy, if not total, restrictions on executable =
memory. Whether or not to accept a proposal for such a feature is not an is=
sue the Committee has previously dealt with.</li><li>The paper did not adeq=
uately show that there was no requirement for language or compiler support =
for implementation. The wording was not sufficiently clear to show that&nbs=
p;</li></ul><div><span style=3D"line-height: 17px;">In addition, the paper =
did not correctly constrain the constructor, similarly to std::function.</s=
pan></div></div><div><span style=3D"line-height: 17px;"><br></span></div><d=
iv><span style=3D"line-height: 17px;">Whether or not a revised paper will p=
ass Committee has yet to be seen, but first, there must be a sample impleme=
ntation which passes the security concerns. This should address most of the=
 issues with the paper.</span></div>

<p></p>

-- <br />
&nbsp;<br />
--- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.<br />
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/=
std-proposals/?hl=3Den">http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-pro=
posals/?hl=3Den</a>.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
&nbsp;<br />

------=_Part_579_8864936.1366462198585--

.