I mean, even Python has references to variables. You can't escape references (as opposed to values).
The difference is one of model. Pointers are an exposure of the underlying computer architecture. Whereas references are more of a property of common language design. In theory, you could not have pointers but still have references.
> Pointers are an exposure of the underlying computer architecture. Whereas references are more of a property of common language design.
Sorry, I just don't follow. How are the pointers in Go more exposing of the underlying architecture than a reference? (I'm using Go as an example to make it concrete, but any language with similar properties will do).
The syntax and some of the semantics of assignment and rebinding are different between say go pointers and python references, but that's the point I'm contesting, I don't see how one is necessarily higher level than the other. If you put automatic memory management, null pointer checks, removal of any "undefined behavior", pointers aren't necessarily low-level. It wasn't the pointer, it was the memory safety.
I personally think that once you tease it out that it becomes a semantics argument that unfortunately doesn't shed much light on what is "high-level".
The difference is one of model. Pointers are an exposure of the underlying computer architecture. Whereas references are more of a property of common language design. In theory, you could not have pointers but still have references.