Oberon had POINTER TO, and acted in what you might expect from a TurboPascal.
Also, wrt pointers, the original Primos was written in Fortran IV, although it was later moved to the PL/I dialect PL/P.
> Because it is constantly compared with C, C++, Java, and scriptingnone of this line of reasoning bears on go's designer's
> languages. Its packages are sold as better than C header files, which
> is demonstrated in Russ' compile time video. It is a compiled language.
> Its syntax is not horribly divergent from C.
intentions. and i would be surprised (shocked actually)
if a vm were omitted for language positioning reasons,
rather than technical ones.
support for pointers isn't a requirement (cf: oberon).
> It has support for pointers, so I guess so. I'd guess it's somewhat
> easier than C++, where you have to have an implementation for new
> before you can do much of anything else very C++-like. That said,
> it does have a language runtime like C++, so I suspect it does need
> some setup before some features (such as threads) can be used.
also there are many things that a language can subtily make
writing a kernel in that language very difficult or impossible.
given that go has a runtime, it's reasonable to ask if the
runtime can be prevented from bothering interrupt routines
and other critical sections. (was this a problem with alef?)
- erik