Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder01.blueworldhosting.com!border4.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news.iecc.com!.POSTED!nerds-end
From: flaps@dgp.toronto.edu (Alan J Rosenthal)
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Subject: Re: Safe Pointers at the Intermediate Language or Hardware Level
Date: 11 Feb 2014 00:58:43 GMT
Organization: Compilers Central
Lines: 8
Sender: news@iecc.com
Approved: comp.compilers@iecc.com
Message-ID: <14-02-008@comp.compilers>
References: <14-02-007@comp.compilers>
NNTP-Posting-Host: news.iecc.com
X-Trace: miucha.iecc.com 1392097240 63627 64.57.183.58 (11 Feb 2014 05:40:40 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@iecc.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 05:40:40 +0000 (UTC)
Keywords: design, C, comment
Posted-Date: 11 Feb 2014 00:40:40 EST
X-submission-address: compilers@iecc.com
X-moderator-address: compilers-request@iecc.com
X-FAQ-and-archives: http://compilers.iecc.com
Xref: csiph.com comp.compilers:1087

I liked the "Saber C" C interpreter a few decades ago.  It had what I think
you are calling "safe pointers".

They had a paper at Usenix in I think the very-late 1980s, but in a
nutshell, every pointer value contained three addresses: the actual
address value, the lowest you were allowed to go with that pointer
value, and the highest you were allowed to go.
[Worked great, but it was an interpreter. -John]