Trust me, none of the memory errors in those examples come from the omission of a `const` in a pointer. It's not like adding `const` to a pointer will write-pro

Trust me, none of the memory errors in those examples come from the omission of a `const` in a pointer. It's not like adding `const` to a pointer will write-protect that memory so that magically exploits become impossible. All those insecurities that lead to exploits are buffer overruns of some sort, and nothing would change about them with this sort of little language change.