Creator of LLVM, Clang, and Swift Says To Not Write Security Critical Code In C/C++

[via Digitalmars-d]

On Tuesday, 14 July 2015 at 09:29:03 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
> On Tuesday, 14 July 2015 at 07:43:27 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
> wrote:
>> Uhm, no. The linked page concludes that security-oriented 
>> software should be written in languages that trap on integer 
>> overflow by default.
>>
>> D  is not better off by having modulo-arithmetics, that means 
>> you cannot even   catch overflow related issues by semantic 
>> analysis, since overflow does not exist. There are  C-like 
>> languages that ensures that overflow is not possible at 
>> compile time (by putting limits on loop iterations and doing 
>> heavy duty proofs).
>
> Correct software can't be written in C because of UB, that's 
> why safer languages are praised for elimination of UB.

This is 100% wrong. UB only happens in the code gen for programs 
that are illegal (per definition incorrect source code).

If your program is correct, then the code cannot trigger UB.