Re: [9fans] dhog the corruptor!

[forsyth@vitanuova.com]

>
> AFAICT, though, dynamically typed languages don't have to worry about it.
> Skeptics would say "that's because the chances for error are already at
> maximum and can't be increased" :)

no, they do have to worry about it; it's just that sometimes they
pretend they don't!   it's one reason our dynamically loadable C
modules aren't in the standard Inferno distribution: i'm not happy
about the absence of type checking across the module to kernel interface.
(the interface the module presents to Limbo code that uses it is checked,
of course, but not its own interface to the kernel.)
it's less of a problem for device drivers because they have a
narrow interface that doesn't change too often.  it does change, though:
ulong one year, vlong the next.