Re: [Chicken-users] Sandbox egg

[Felix Winkelmann]

On Fri, 06 Aug 2004 12:55:49 +0200, Thomas Chust <address@hidden> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I played around with the sandbox egg yesterday -- it's really cool  
> stuff. But I think I found something that should be changed in the  
> source: The definition of safe-eval reads like this (safe-eval.scm:917):
>    (define (safe-eval exp #!key (environment (current-safe-environment))  
> fuel allocation-limit)
>
> I would rather suggest this, though:
>    (define (safe-eval exp #!key (environment (current-safe-environment))  
> (fuel (current-fuel)) (allocation-limit (current-allocation-limit)))
>
> So the default parameters are actually used, if set!

Well, it was like that first, but what if safe-eval is called inside
safe-eval? (then the inner safe-eval has only what's left from the outer
one).

It's also hard to find useful default settings, these will likely to be
different between different application areas.


cheers,
felix