On 3/23/26 3:49 PM, Peter Duffy wrote:
> Maybe memory safety is actually not a property of the language or the
> program - but of the programmer?
>
> Most languages have features which can be very useful, but which can
> also be dangerous if misused, either carelessly or deliberately
> (pointer arithmetic in C is only one example). The onus is on the
> programmer being skilled and diligent enough to use the features
> safely.
>
> On Mon, 2026-03-23 at 11:08 +0200, Marin Ivanov wrote:
>> 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
>> _______________________________________________
>> Dng mailing list
>> Dng@???
>> Manage your subscription:
>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
>> Archive: https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/list/dng.en.html
> _______________________________________________
> Dng mailing list
> Dng@???
> Manage your subscription: https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
> Archive: https://lists.dyne.org/lurker/list/dng.en.html

Though I rarely see its use by other then embedded system programmers
    man 3 mcheck

I use it for all X11 coding since many of the X functions can leak.
REGEX is another good use of mcheck. To automate, I use an atexit(3) stack.