cbmc | dmd | |
---|---|---|
5 | 148 | |
765 | 2,893 | |
3.5% | 0.4% | |
9.9 | 9.9 | |
2 days ago | 7 days ago | |
C++ | D | |
GNU General Public License v3.0 or later | Boost Software License 1.0 |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
cbmc
-
Xr0 Makes C Safer than Rust
This appears to be more limited than what CBMC[1] (the C Bounded Model Checker) can do. CBMC can do function contracts. CBMC can prove memory safety and even the absence of memory leaks for non-trivial code bases that pass pointers all over the place that must eventually be freed. Applying all the annotations to make this happen though is like 10x the work of getting the program actually running in the first place. CBMC definitely makes C safer than even safe Rust for projects that can invest the time to use it. There is an experimental Rust front end to CBMC called Kani[2] that aims to verify unsafe Rust (thus making unsafe Rust become safe) but it is far from the speed and robustness of the C front end.
[1] https://github.com/diffblue/cbmc
[2] https://github.com/model-checking/kani
-
The C Bounded Model Checker: Criminally Underused
https://github.com/diffblue/cbmc/issues/7732 I'll note that some form of undefined behavior checking / documentation is on the roadmap for the next major version
- CBMC: The C Bounded Model Checker
-
Using the Kani Rust Verifier on Tokio Bytes
So it seems to use cmbc and a bunch of other tools from cprover under the hood (bundled in the github release and setup on first run...). I would really like to have this "how" more visible in the documentation, it's essential to hint at the limitations of such an automated prover, even if the underlying system is rather powerful.
-
Hard Things in Computer Science
> The only reliable way to have bug-free code is to prove it. It requires solid mathematical foundations and a programming language that allows formal proofs.
I'm going to be the "actually" guy and say that, actually, you can formally verify some studff about programs written in traditional/mainstream languages, like C. Matter of fact, this is a pretty lively research area, with some tools like CBMC [0] and Infer [1] also getting significant adoption in the industry.
[0]: https://github.com/diffblue/cbmc
[1]: https://fbinfer.com/
dmd
- Results of the Grand C++ Error Explosion Competition
- A History of C Compilers – Part 1: Performance, Portability and Freedom
- D2 Playground
-
DMD Compiler as a Library: A Call to Arms
Here's the pipeline spitting out the same error as on my macbook did.
https://github.com/dlang/dmd/actions/runs/8023469412/job/219...
-
My favourite Git commit (2019)
Not completely on topic (if you read TFA) but my favorite Git commit is by compiler badass and HN frequenter, where he checks in an entire C compiler to the D language repo:
https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/12507
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27102584
-
The C Bounded Model Checker: Criminally Underused
A new generated code alone is 4000 lines long [1]. The actual code added is just 2000 lines, and some are used to pay debts, I mean, to make a proper code generator (which can be alternatively written in a simpler scripting langauge). In any case it is never comparable to the entier C parser proper.
[1] https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/15307/files#diff-3677bcc89...
-
OpenD, a D language fork that is open to your contributions
D is completely opensource already (https://github.com/dlang/dmd). The "open" of OpenD is just ADR saying that OpenD will be more open to new language features than D has historically been.
-
The OpenD Programming Language (fork of D)
The reference compiler, DMD, is open source: https://github.com/dlang/dmd
But they don't accept just any Pull Request or features the community submits, understandably. There's a process called DIP for language improvements: https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/README.md
However, by some accounts, it's really hard to get anything through.
Given D already has so many feature, I find that to be a good thing , to be honest, by not everyone agrees, of course.
- Odin Programming Language
- D Programming Language