RE: Persistence Pros and Cons

[Christopher Nelson]

> > Why would state need to be serializable?
> 
> I meant: in a non-persistent system.  The reason for my 
> question is that Jonathan concluded that persistence is 
> mostly "a matter of taste".
> Passive translators seem to be a counter-example.
> 

Ah. Well, it seems to me that capabilities must not be serializable.  If they 
could be, what would stop a thread from modifying the capabilities as they 
flowed back to the kernel?  If the serializing entity was part of the TCB, then 
you have to implement a certain amount of persistence anyway.  Once you start 
implementing persistence by degrees you run into a whole bunch of edge cases 
where it's just easier to implement system-wide persistence anyway.  That's 
been my experience, in any case.

-={C}=-