From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/10150
Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Jens Staal <staal1978@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general
Subject: Re: checked C (clang) vs musl?
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 18:04:13 +0200
Organization: Ghent University
Message-ID: <1847860.SX7tW21DZJ@krypton>
References: <1538179.HIKevB6DqT@krypton> <20160616154847.GS22574@port70.net>
Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1466093071 24848 80.91.229.3 (16 Jun 2016 16:04:31 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 16:04:31 +0000 (UTC)
To: musl@lists.openwall.com
Original-X-From: musl-return-10163-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Thu Jun 16 18:04:29 2016
Return-path: <musl-return-10163-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com>
Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org
Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200])
	by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <musl-return-10163-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com>)
	id 1bDZmP-00031b-Ij
	for gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org; Thu, 16 Jun 2016 18:04:29 +0200
Original-Received: (qmail 15910 invoked by uid 550); 16 Jun 2016 16:04:27 -0000
Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:musl@lists.openwall.com>
List-Help: <mailto:musl-help@lists.openwall.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:musl-unsubscribe@lists.openwall.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:musl-subscribe@lists.openwall.com>
List-ID: <musl.lists.openwall.com>
Original-Received: (qmail 15890 invoked from network); 16 Jun 2016 16:04:27 -0000
X-Virus-Scanned: by UGent DICT
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at irc.ugent.be
X-Face: 4)/YSxxYo:[1<w6lTvaE]*xx7ZRhy!L5e~k$i:20Uv+SyAv^GdU6Tr$ZLSu}l'{TMD7*Lw \4j.I6S9I!1;NkxwDee~~VHRha(,VZ[nb#gj!.Y,5x[~)Fa7,263u=^{2d\"G>~V(F$.0L EAFcV"dvng*f4MKT(KQ?OCN`o0L+"H=.2@/sTz.7LijVh$:/7%N6FYTMyxsi#1%Q,tYj`e *NkDN,;~vFDEmCX{B(4YkAS8vJ^Fjp.BzBisxjgo$3}+9~("pu>q.G_NIzP-v{2}w<aos\ ].Tc.!C1!F:|x:Gp-B+`[Vg0Ls(0<`z-b$?Af1Y5[f,MPp^kx4
User-Agent: KMail/5.2.2 (Linux/4.6.2-1-ARCH; KDE/5.23.0; x86_64; ; )
In-Reply-To: <20160616154847.GS22574@port70.net>
X-Miltered: at jchkm3 with ID 5762CDFE.006 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://helpdesk.ugent.be/email/)!
X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 5762CDFE.006 from cp0433.irc.ugent.be/cp0433.irc.ugent.be/157.193.189.19/smtp.dmbr.UGent.be/<staal1978@gmail.com>
X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 5762CDFE.006 on smtp3.ugent.be : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000
X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham
Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:10150
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/10150>

On torsdag 16 juni 2016 kl. 17:48:47 CEST Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> * Jens Staal <staal1978@gmail.com> [2016-06-16 17:35:07 +0200]:
> > and apparently they have made a modified llvm/clang for checked C.
> > https://github.com/Microsoft/checkedc-clang
> > 
> > anyone tested this vs musl?
> 
> i thought it would need a lot of annotations to be useful.

It introduces some new types etc, but I thought it also analyzed existing 
vanilla C code for unsafe behaviour. I just saw the news so I have not really 
read up on it, but was curious to know if someone had.