Allowing relative file imports

[Walter Bright]

Georg Wrede wrote:
> Walter Bright wrote:
>> There's no reason in principle that D could not be used instead.
> 
> True. But then, what would happen to the Systems Language image of D in 
> folks' minds, if it is run in a browser, next to Javascript, Java, and 
> who knows what "toy" languages? Would Phobos then have to be replaced 
> with another library for running the app within a browser?

One would use the "safe" subset of D for that.

>> This means that we should think about security issues. Compiling 
>> untrusted code should not result in an attack on your system.
> 
> Well, removing disk file ops, and OS APIs in general would be the first 
> step. And if you restrict some include paths, then, for symmetry, you 
> should restrict all command line file paths similarly. I think there's a 
> lot to do here. A half baked version would just give bad PR, but a 
> proper and tight version presumably is quite some work -- but is the 
> reward worth it? Is it established that enough people would use it?
> 
> Are you thinking of having a parallell Phobos tree for this, or doing it 
> with conditional compilation?

I haven't thought that far.


> But really, what I'm wondering here is, is this yet another "hey let's 
> do this" thing?? Can we go on like this till September? And where would 
> we be then? Shouldn't there be like a roadmap, or something? Or priorities?

The import file thing has been around a long time. I am not planning on 
changing it in the near future.