Re: [RFC] Default expression

On 26/08/2024 19:11, Matthew Weier O'Phinney wrote:

On Mon, Aug 26, 2024, 12:02 PM Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com> wrote:

    I recognize that "limiting the allowed expression structures
    arbitrarily is way harder than it sounds" is a valid argument as
    well.  At the same time, John C has offered some valid examples of
    cases where it would open up additional footguns, and we want to
    minimize those in general.  Those shouldn't be ignored, either.

This seems like a valid and balanced position from Larry.

IF it's possible to accomplish, I think it's better to identify the "leaving this open will create WTF situations" than to prematurely lock _everything_ down up front. There's been a few good lists about the cool things this could enable, demonstrating the value; maybe now we should focus on the "we absolutely shouldn't enable" pieces to allow for broader consensus.

I like this approach. I'm still not sure I'd want to pursue adding exclusions, but if we can identify something that's obviously bad and/or dangerous then we can consider that short list for exclusion. That is much more compelling than starting out by banning everything and arbitrarily whitelisting those things someone personally has a use for. Cheers, Bilge