Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!bellcore!texbell!wuarchive!decwrl!megatest!djones
From: djones@megatest.UUCP (Dave Jones)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: Anyone want to design a language?
Message-ID: <12098@goofy.megatest.UUCP>
Date: 22 Feb 90 00:03:56 GMT
References: <14242@lambda.UUCP>
Distribution: usa
Organization: Megatest Corporation, San Jose, Ca
Lines: 26

From article <14242@lambda.UUCP>, by jlg@lambda.UUCP (Jim Giles):
> Experiments have also
> shown that people work better if flow control is _not_ done with 
> so-called compound statements.)
> 


Please elaborate.


>> ...
>> I agree with C's philosophy of only allowing bit packing inside
>> structures. Other packing methods would really mangle the concept of
>> pointers.
> 
> In languages with recursive data types, direct dynamic memory (like 
> ALLOCATABLE in Fortran 90), and type coersion I've never seen the 
> need for pointers _AT_ALL_!!  So, rejecting something because it
> interferes with pointers is a null issue.
> 


Huh? I think somebody missed the point. Those 'recursive data structures'
etc. are just teaming with pointers. Whether the programer declares them,
or the compiler sneaks them in, the hardware still wants them to point to
properly aligned data.