Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> I would gladly take a compiler that could not allocate local variables in registers

That sounds rather extreme. I imagine it would be ruinous to performance. To my knowledge the various safe alternatives to C have no trouble with register allocation. Safe Rust and Ada SPARK, for instance, or even Java.

> The standard does not preclude storing a raw pointer and a length together. Why couldn't the compiler do something like that and do a bounds check?

That technique is called fat pointers. It's been well researched. Walter Bright, who just posted a comment elsewhere in this thread, has a blog post on it. [0] I imagine ABI incompatibility is one of the main reasons it hasn't caught on.

C++ compilers do something similar, storing array lengths in an address like myArray[-1]. They need to store array lengths at runtime because of the delete[] operator (unless they can optimise it away of course). C++ still allows all sorts of pointer arithmetic though, so it wouldn't be easy for a compiler to offer Java-like guarantees against out-of-bounds access. Doing so takes a sophisticated tool like Valgrind rather than just another flag to gcc.

[0] https://digitalmars.com/articles/C-biggest-mistake.html




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: