[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Emacs Lisp's future
From: |
Stephen J. Turnbull |
Subject: |
Re: Emacs Lisp's future |
Date: |
Tue, 07 Oct 2014 09:35:15 +0900 |
David Kastrup writes:
> In a security relevant context, you would just not reencode before
> passing the information back to the outside.
That is ill-defined and almost surely not conforming to the process's
documentation, and therefore would not be acceptable in a security
context.
- Re: Emacs Lisp's future, (continued)
- Re: Emacs Lisp's future, David Kastrup, 2014/10/06
- Re: Emacs Lisp's future, Mark H Weaver, 2014/10/06
- Re: Emacs Lisp's future, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/10/06
- Re: Emacs Lisp's future, David Kastrup, 2014/10/06
- Re: Emacs Lisp's future, David Kastrup, 2014/10/06
- Re: Emacs Lisp's future, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/10/06
- Re: Emacs Lisp's future, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2014/10/06
- Re: Emacs Lisp's future, David Kastrup, 2014/10/06
- Re: Emacs Lisp's future,
Stephen J. Turnbull <=
- Re: Emacs Lisp's future, Richard Stallman, 2014/10/07
- Re: Emacs Lisp's future, David Kastrup, 2014/10/07
- Re: Emacs Lisp's future, Andreas Schwab, 2014/10/07
- Re: Emacs Lisp's future, David Kastrup, 2014/10/07
- Re: Emacs Lisp's future, Andreas Schwab, 2014/10/07
- Re: Emacs Lisp's future, David Kastrup, 2014/10/07
- Re: Emacs Lisp's future, Andreas Schwab, 2014/10/07
- Re: Emacs Lisp's future, David Kastrup, 2014/10/07
- Re: Emacs Lisp's future, Andreas Schwab, 2014/10/07
- Re: Emacs Lisp's future, David Kastrup, 2014/10/07