From your linked post: > https://www.cis.upenn.edu/~eir/papers/2013/ironclad/paper.pdf https://www.cis.upenn.edu/~eir/papers/2013/ironclad/paper.pd... It stil

From your linked post: > https://www.cis.upenn.edu/~eir/papers/2013/ironclad/paper.pdf https://www.cis.upenn.edu/~eir/papers/2013/ironclad/paper.pd... It still relies on dynamic checks. So you still have the same problem as in Java: just because you have a reference, it doesn't mean you actually have a valid object. You can make any language trivially safe by checking absolutely everything at runtime, but the whole point to using a language like C++ is to not incur in unnecessary performance overheads. > http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/marron/selectpubs/Undangle.pdf http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/marron/selectp... Have you actually read the paper? This isn't a static analysis at all. It just makes a dynamic analysis more eager and precise.