Hi Chris,

On Mon, 23 Mar 2026 19:57:49 +1100
Chris Angelico via Dng <dng@???> wrote:

> On Mon, 23 Mar 2026 at 19:48, Marin Ivanov <metala@???> wrote:
> > There is a valid subset of C programs that are memory-safe,
> > therefore there could be a tool that consumes arbitrary code and
> > converts it to memory-safe one. I'd argue that it could be done for
> > assembly, as well.
> >
>
> Hmm, doesn't that just move the problem to a different level of
> abstraction? Suppose, for example, that you made a perfectly
> memory-safe implementation of the Ook language (which is Turing
> complete), and then wrote a fully standards-compliant C compiler that
> outputs Ook code. Does that mean that all C programs are now
> memory-safe?

I don't argue that "all C programs are memory-safe". My whole point is
that memory-safety is not a property of a language, but of the
program. In this case the C-Ook-object-code compiler produces
memory-safe programs.

Kind regards,
Marin