> Because it is constantly compared with C, C++, Java, and scripting > 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.
none of this line of reasoning bears on go's designer's intentions. and i would be surprised (shocked actually) if a vm were omitted for language positioning reasons, rather than technical ones. > 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. support for pointers isn't a requirement (cf: oberon). 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
