It's not low level, though, that was my original misunderstanding. Heartbleed was not a memory safety issue like I incorrectly assumed. It could happen in, say, C#, or Java. In fact, there's probably existing code with the same bug. It's not uncommon to reuse objects in managed code as a performance hack.
I'd argue that that's a bit low-level, actually. If you're starting to manage your own memory like that then you're still at a higher level than C, but not as high-level as the functional languages, for example.
Honestly, if the end of your collection is beyond the addresses of that collection's valid data then you've just malloc'ed. Is it worth the bugs?
How to malloc in a high-level language(assuming a typecast always succeeds): 1. Make a reference in main (this way it's object will never be garbage collected) 2. Make this reference to an array of objects(hereafter referred to as the "block"), where each object holds n integers. 3. Whenever you wish to save an object to the block, cast it to the class which the block contains and cast from that class when you want to retrieve one.
Is the above idea good for performance? Possibly. Does it belong in a cryptography library/program? Nope.
