当前在线人数11413
首页 - 分类讨论区 - 电脑网络 - 窗口里的风景版 -阅读文章
未名交友
[更多]
[更多]
文章阅读:Re: 你们最不喜欢.net的什么?
[同主题阅读] [版面: 窗口里的风景] [作者:les] , 2007年03月09日15:35:10
les
进入未名形象秀
我的博客
[上篇] [下篇] [同主题上篇] [同主题下篇]

发信人: les (Walk the walk, talk the talk), 信区: DotNet
标  题: Re: 你们最不喜欢.net的什么?
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Fri Mar  9 15:35:10 2007)

hehe, we have a very good discussion here.
But it's not neccessary to focus too much on the specific word(Opaque,Safe
or Type safe).
I think people know about this tradeoff(Opaque/flexible) from day one.

Let's take a look what MSDN says:

Type Safety, Security, and Verifiability

Delegates are entirely opaque structures. There are no operations on
delegates except for a constructor, and methods to invoke the encapsulated
function. The code of even these methods is supplied by the runtime rather
than by the compiler. The runtime is able to guarantee the encapsulated
method has the correct signature. Since a delegate encapsulates an object
reference, it can rely on the metadata for this object to maintain types-
safety at runtime. That is the key to a delegate being typesafe and
verifiable.

A delegate can be considered a mechanism to indirectly invoke a method. Such
an invocation retains the semantics of the more conventional method
invocation, however, in that the method invocation is polymorphic, and it is
not possible to bypass any security demands on the actual method that gets
invoked. Security is not compromised when indirectly invoking methods
through delegates.
【 在 Deling (流浪歌手-爬爬死爬腰酸) 的大作中提到: 】
: again, you don't get it, this has nothing to do with type safety.
: at



--

※ 来源:·BBS 未名空间站 http://mitbbs.com·[FROM: 192.168.]

[上篇] [下篇] [同主题上篇] [同主题下篇]
[转寄] [转贴] [回信给作者] [修改文章] [删除文章] [同主题阅读] [从此处展开] [返回版面] [快速返回] [收藏] [举报]
 
回复文章
标题:
内 容:

未名交友
将您的链接放在这儿

友情链接


 

Site Map - Contact Us - Terms and Conditions - Privacy Policy

版权所有,未名空间(mitbbs.com),since 1996