| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Rationale: Our weak-vs-strong design is a bit confused at the moment
due to concerns about deduplication and capability semantics. It's
not clear that a general "change strong to weak" method is
compatible with what we want to provide.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
I've made doing some design choices here:
* Reserving "rpc" as a prefix for post-authentication
functionality that is not arti-specific.
* Declaring these to be methods on the session rather than methods
on the objects themselves.
There's a problem with defining an API to drop a weak reference; see
comment in code.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
This will make it easier to change the semantics of what exactly we
return, whether it has to be/contain a client, whether you can use
it to look up all the live objects, &etc.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
These are about to become nondeterministic-ish and probably shouldn't
use the Into/TryFrom traits.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
