script(2) [was: [CFT/review] new sendfile(2)]

[Alfred Perlstein]

On 9/1/14 2:34 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> --------
> In message <5404D1B8.9010006 at mu.org>, Alfred Perlstein writes:
>
>>> In message <5403B13C.60008 at freebsd.org>, Alfred Perlstein writes:
>>>
>>>> Lua at the syscall level makes sense. :)
>>> I doubt it.
>>>
>>> We're looking at high performance stuff and we don't want a silly
>>> parser and string processing involved.
>>>
>> Would it really matter?  Lua is bytecode, [...]
> I though you wanted the interpreter in the kernel.
>
> If it's only the executor, then ... maybe...
>
> We'd need to do a serious audit of the lua bytecode first...
>
So you mean you'd inject the lua bytecode into kernel?  Hmm, I'm not 
sure it matters, either way would be interesting.  I think losing "eval" 
expressions might not be worth it.  Just because you *can* write bad 
code, doesn't mean you should bar it because those facilities can be 
made to make very interesting things.

-Alfred