Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!yale!cmcl2!lanl!jlg
From: jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: Pointers are abstractions
Message-ID: <65671@lanl.gov>
Date: 13 Oct 90 01:27:04 GMT
References: <26362@megaron.cs.arizona.edu>
Organization: Los Alamos Natl Lab, Los Alamos, N.M.
Lines: 16

From article <26362@megaron.cs.arizona.edu>, by gudeman@cs.arizona.edu (David Gudeman):
> [...  Long description about the abstract semantics of pointers ...]


Congratulations.  You've reinvented a variation of one of the standard
ways to describe pointers abstractly.  It _may_ even be right, I don't
plan to check it.

You missed the point the other person was making though.  Of course
pointers can be described mathematically - a computer is a formal
system: EVERYTHING on it can be formalized mathematically.  That's
not the issue.  The question is: do you ever have to introduce
pointers into the semantic description of anything _else_?  The
almost universal answer is NO.

J. Giles