Fil-C: A memory-safe C implementation

Re:Fil-C: A memory-safe C implementation by EPWN3D on Tuesday October 28, 2025 @08:25PM (#45741127)

You don't even need to reverse it. It's in the public clang, and I'm working on helping my team adopt it in some test cases.

And it's not just the bounds-checking that's great -- it makes a bunch of C anti-patterns much harder, and it makes you think a lot harder about pointer ownership and usage. Really a great addition to the language, and it's source-compatible with empty macro-definitions (with two exceptions).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Fil-C: A memory-safe C implementation by pizlonator on Tuesday October 28, 2025 @11:33PM (#45742314)

> It's in the public clang

I think you’re thinking of something else

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Fil-C: A memory-safe C implementation by debugnik on Wednesday October 29, 2025 @03:58AM (#45743934)

It or something similar has apparently been upstreamed to clang as -fbounds-safety. I don't know if they're the same, but the RFC on -fbounds-safety does give some credit to the author of Fil-C, who also took credit for firebloom on this thread as well.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Fil-C: A memory-safe C implementation by pizlonator on Wednesday October 29, 2025 @08:30AM (#45745961)

Not the same

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Fil-C: A memory-safe C implementation by debugnik on Wednesday October 29, 2025 @06:15PM (#45753798)

Thanks for clarifying, I had found a past HN comment stating they are the same.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Fil-C: A memory-safe C implementation by kragen on Tuesday October 28, 2025 @08:35PM (#45741184)

Interesting! How do you get started?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Fil-C: A memory-safe C implementation by EPWN3D on Friday October 31, 2025 @09:39AM (#45771861)

-fbounds-safety is the flag. https://clang.llvm.org/docs/BoundsSafety.html

[ Parent | on HN ]