These are good points but no name is ever perfect. Just felt that secc was more memorable and would offer more levarage to this great project :-)
Re:Fil-C: A memory-safe C implementation
by kragen on Wednesday October 29, 2025 @02:07PM
(#45750747)
"Filthy" is already extremely memorable.
Re:Fil-C: A memory-safe C implementation
by kragen on Wednesday October 29, 2025 @01:48PM
(#45750490)
I agree. I'd add that security is always relative to not just an existing level of security but to a threat model. There are threat models relative to which Fil-C doesn't make things more secure. (I can't think of one under which Fil-C makes things less secure, though.)
A similar criticism applies to "new". Newcastle is named after a castle built 945 years ago. Neuchâtel is named after a castle built 1014 years ago. Xavier (from Basque "etxeberri", "new house") is named after a castle built in the 10th century. Windows NT "new technology", etc.
Reason: there's no solution to the security problem. Fil-C doesn't solve security. Does it make things more secure? Yes! But there will always be more security issues. So imagine if I had called it "Secure C" (and then had a sexy compiler), and 10 years from now someone finds a comprehensive solution to the string injection problem in Secure C. What do they call their thing? Securer C? Secure C Pro? Secure Secure C?