<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 10:23 AM, Damian Johnson <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:atagar@torproject.org" target="_blank">atagar@torproject.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">

> (What I'm *not* thrilled about is the idea of using an embedded<br>
> interpreter for this kind of stuff, or embarking on any direction that<br>
> requires us to rewrite too much of the program at once.  That way, in<br>
> my opinion, lies long-term destabilization.)<br>
<br>
Understandable, though doesn't avoiding an interpreter drop most<br>
modern languages from consideration (and any sandboxing an interpreter<br>
would provide)? What did you have in mind instead?<br></blockquote><div><br>I would like to point out the existence of some modern, high-level, compiled languages. For instance: Haskell, OCaml, and Go.<br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">

Cheers! -Damian<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
tor-dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:tor-dev@lists.torproject.org">tor-dev@lists.torproject.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev" target="_blank">https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br>