[lelanthran]

> My point regarding WG14 wasn't to add SDS as they are, rather vocabulary types for strings and arrays in the same spirit as SDS.

Well, yes, I'd love to see some proper string support too, so at least we're in agreement about that :-)

But, overhauling C with additional (memory-safe) array types and string types that are nonetheless still compatible with legacy uses is probably a non-starter anyway. The only way forward would be to add a new type that isn't compatible, which is unpalatable to a lot of people (myself included).

Adding memory-safe functions and/or semantics is easier, but will probably not cover 100% of the memory-safety desired.

> When they exist as vocabulary types, the ecosystem can rely on their existence and slowly adopt their use, similarly to threads support introduction in C11, for example.

Threads, I feel, are a poor example for two reasons: 1) Hardly any code uses the `thread_t` type for a variety of reasons, and 2) There was no need for a `thread_t` type to be backward compatible with anything.

[pjmlp]

For full memory safety with C the only option are the C Machines, meaning hardware memory tagging.

Already in use for a decade in Solaris SPARC, and eventually mainstream across all variations of ARM CPUs.

Unfortunely Intel botched their MPX implementation and now it is gone.