Lists Home |
Date Index |
On Monday 11 February 2002 03:40 pm, Paul Prescod wrote:
> > That's sort of vaguely usable, though I don't think I'd want to
> > implement anything deeply recursive on that. For hypertext
> > navigation, I guess it'll do.
> This is more or less the model used by functional programming
> languages that have nothing *except* recursion. It is known in that
> world as a "continuation." It's also a proven strategy on the Web as
> we use it already.
Continuations have a closure as well... in other words, typically, a
continuation represents system state at a given point in time...
typically by snapshotting the execution The terms here are
interesting, because continuation and more importantly "closure" are
the two terms that come explicitly to mind when I think of all the
problems with HTTP, visibility, and open disclosure.
> You don't need to send a pile of URIs. You send one. It refers to
> the last state of our transaction.
If this represents the last state of the application, what stops an
intermediary (proxy) from using it and thereby spoofing the system?
> Only your wife and you have the URI.
Not if you're on AOL ;-)