3 ms·

Thanks! Two notes: GCC has its "access" attributes which can give you similar bounds safety as clang. Please see also my experimental library. https://codeber

by uecker 6mo ago

Thanks! Two notes: GCC has its "access" attributes which can give you similar bounds safety as clang. Please see also my experimental library. https://codeberg.org/uecker/noplate/ https://codeberg.org/uecker/noplate/ While I do not had enough time to polish it yet, I think it provides some very nice interfaces with improve type and bounds safety, and are also rather convenient. Also I wonder what parts are redundant if you have FORTIFY_SOURCE ? (And thank you for working in this topic. If you continue, please reach out to us)

EPWN3D 6mo ago
I'll have to give the access attributes a look, I hadn't heard of them. (My team were sitting back on gcc-12, so not up to speed on the latest.) I think I had seen noplate before -- looks like you're taking advantage of the anonymous struct compatibility changes in C23? Those are going to open up a lot of possibilities. Regardless I'd love to stay in touch -- by "us" do you mean the working group?
- uecker 6mo ago
  In principle, the are supported already with gcc 12 or even earlier, but this is evolving. https://godbolt.org/z/88qv3jjTM https://godbolt.org/z/88qv3jjTM I use c23 features but also vm-types for bounds checking which are older (i need the statement expression extension though): https://godbolt.org/z/T96T89Yhc https://godbolt.org/z/T96T89Yhc yes, with us I mean wg14 (or just me).
pseudohadamard 6mo ago
Does anyone know if clang's "<type> <annotation> <variable-name>" format can be given as "<annotation> <type> <variable-name>"? PREfast has been doing this for over 20 years and it looks like a lot of the clang annotations map directly to PREfast ones, it would allow a vast amount of PREfast-annotated code to be used with clang.