Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[Merged by Bors] - bevy_reflect:
ReflectFromPtr
to create&dyn Reflect
from a*const ()
#4475[Merged by Bors] - bevy_reflect:
ReflectFromPtr
to create&dyn Reflect
from a*const ()
#4475Changes from all commits
cddb930
3038e3f
6438f55
4665195
07b60d6
e35f498
9553bfe
b42b30f
75bfd0a
0016eb1
156f9f9
55fb2ea
939d49f
31ec938
be78fd7
b994928
e51c5af
a9ce062
bd91c13
4b9e974
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't think we're in a place where we can treat "arbitrary rust code running in the users' program" as untrusted. Given that rust can do "anything", if there is arbitrary malicious code in a users' program, it is already compromised no matter what we do. Things like public/private visibility don't mean anything here when you can create a mirror struct that provides access and then unsafely cast a pointer to that struct.
We can only provide these guarantees in a sandbox with tight controls over data that passes the boundary. This api won't provide that, so idk if I see the point here (feel free to tell me if/how I'm wrong).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hmm, I thought we were trying to be sound? In that case, we'd treat all safe code as untrusted, and make sure that safe code cannot add requirements to an unsafe function.
Basically, this comment really really confuses me.