Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by masklinn 2899 days ago
> While it implicitely hides everything on the first call

I think that's the really weird bit, I guess they didn't want multiple functions but it would make more sense to veil() (hide everything), unveil(path, mode) (show that path) and lockveil(), something along those lines. Or maybe use some sort of mode constants e.g. veil(VEIL_INIT), veil(VEIL_REVEAL, path, mode), veil(VEIL_LOCK).
2 comments
jakobegger 2899 days ago
What benefit would requiring veil() before unveil() have? There is no point in calling unveil() if the file system isn't hidden. Making the hiding implicit reduces the number of possible mistakes people can make when using the API.
link
daveFNbuck 2899 days ago
You could be more sure that something else didn't already unveil things you want hidden in your current invocation.
link
shoo 2899 days ago
The end game might be that everything is veiled by default, so if you have no unveil calls then your process can't read anything
link
masklinn 2899 days ago
That would work just as well with a better API. The initial call would just become a no-op at that point.
link