Derivation of PL/I (was Usenet group for PL/M language) 
Author Message
 Derivation of PL/I (was Usenet group for PL/M language)

Quote:




> > > > Is PL/M somehow related to C or is the comp.lang.c in the
> > > > Newsgroups: line completely gratuitous?

> > > Actually, they are both related indirectly to the "big daddy" of
> > > algorithmic languages; namely, Algol.  PL/M was based on PL/I which was
> > > based on Algol.  A lot of people will claim that PL/I is a combination
> > > of fortran and COBOL (these two names will always be acronyms to me).

> > In fact, PL/I was derived from Algol, COBOL, and Fortran,
> > taking and improving on the best features of each of those
> > languages.

> > From Algol came block structures and dynamic arrays etc,
> > from COBOL came data structures, full error control,
> > record I/O and picture formatting, and from Fortran came formatted I/O
> > and scientific computation.  It also included, for the first time
> > in a general ourpose language, list processing facilities.

> And some of the worst features as well.  Implicit declaration of variables
> like Fortran.

Originally, it had that, but for some years implicit declarations
may be flagged as errors.
However, you're overlooking the fact that that lists of variables and
their types were able to be printed (unlike Fortran)

Quote:
> Willy-nilly pointer conversion no matter how absurd [even eclipsing the wild
> abandon of C].

?? Don't know what you mean.

- Show quoted text -

Quote:
> Nice language though.  It has some really nice data processing features.



Mon, 01 Jul 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Derivation of PL/I (was Usenet group for PL/M language)
Yep, Pascal was likewise derived from Algol by Prof Wirth and is almost
identical to PL/M, another derivative.

To my mind, C was a regressive step which became popular against all
odds and spawned a new kind of COBOL, called C++. Eventually, some
Canadian saw the light and created Oak, a kind of C--, better known as
Java...

So, despite some wheel spin, we are slowly inching forward.

Speaking of wheel spin, today was -20C (that's about 0F for the Yanks
out there) and the roads were very slick - the wife did a 360 in the
road but managed to miss all the other cars and that was with a 4 wheel
drive...

Personally, I'm getting bored with all these Algol type languages.  It
is high time that somebody create something truly new; something better
than Visual Basic...

Have fun,

Herman
http://www.AerospaceSoftware.com

Quote:





> > > > > Is PL/M somehow related to C or is the comp.lang.c in the
> > > > > Newsgroups: line completely gratuitous?

> > > > Actually, they are both related indirectly to the "big daddy" of
> > > > algorithmic languages; namely, Algol.  PL/M was based on PL/I which was
> > > > based on Algol.  A lot of people will claim that PL/I is a combination
> > > > of FORTRAN and COBOL (these two names will always be acronyms to me).

> > > In fact, PL/I was derived from Algol, COBOL, and Fortran,
> > > taking and improving on the best features of each of those
> > > languages.

> > > From Algol came block structures and dynamic arrays etc,
> > > from COBOL came data structures, full error control,
> > > record I/O and picture formatting, and from Fortran came formatted I/O
> > > and scientific computation.  It also included, for the first time
> > > in a general ourpose language, list processing facilities.

> > And some of the worst features as well.  Implicit declaration of variables
> > like Fortran.

> Originally, it had that, but for some years implicit declarations
> may be flagged as errors.
> However, you're overlooking the fact that that lists of variables and
> their types were able to be printed (unlike Fortran)

> > Willy-nilly pointer conversion no matter how absurd [even eclipsing the wild
> > abandon of C].

> ?? Don't know what you mean.

> > Nice language though.  It has some really nice data processing features.



Tue, 02 Jul 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Derivation of PL/I (was Usenet group for PL/M language)

Quote:
> Personally, I'm getting bored with all these Algol type languages.  It
> is high time that somebody create something truly new; something better
> than visual BASIC...

Why does it have to be new to be better than Visual Basic (, C, Java,
Pascal...)?

Lisp has been around for 40+ years...



Tue, 02 Jul 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Derivation of PL/I (was Usenet group for PL/M language)
Yah, maybe it is time for me to investigate that one.  I've used a few
tools built with Lisp and they were all very good, but I've never read
anything on the language itself.  So I have no idea what I am missing...
Quote:

> > Personally, I'm getting bored with all these Algol type languages.  It
> > is high time that somebody create something truly new; something better
> > than visual BASIC...

> Why does it have to be new to be better than Visual Basic (, C, Java,
> Pascal...)?

> Lisp has been around for 40+ years...



Tue, 02 Jul 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Derivation of PL/I (was Usenet group for PL/M language)

Quote:

> However, you're overlooking the fact that that lists of variables and
> their types were able to be printed (unlike Fortran)

Not sure exactly what you mean by this.  Doesn't FORTRAN have "Namelist I/O", or am I misinterpreting what you
wrote ? (Granted, I don't think Namelist handles type info per se' but certainly lists of variables & their
values)

Just curious......

(Followups trimmed to pl/1 newsgroup)



Tue, 02 Jul 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Derivation of PL/I (was Usenet group for PL/M language)

Quote:

>> Personally, I'm getting bored with all these Algol type languages.  It
>> is high time that somebody create something truly new; something better
>> than visual BASIC...

> Why does it have to be new to be better than Visual Basic (, C, Java,
> Pascal...)?

> Lisp has been around for 40+ years...

Smalltalk's been around a while, too.  Quite different than Algol-type
languages...  ;-\

--
_Chris Sonnack, 3M/HEMT ______________________|||||||||||||||||||||||||
_3M Center, Bld 235-1E-47 ____________________| How's my programming? |
______________________________________________| Call: 1-800-DEV-NULL  |

Opinions expressed herein are my own and may not represent those of my employer.



Tue, 02 Jul 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Derivation of PL/I (was Usenet group for PL/M language)

Quote:

> Yep, Pascal was likewise derived from Algol by Prof Wirth and is almost
> identical to PL/M, another derivative.

Pascal and PL/M have very little in common.
Quote:
> Have fun,

> Herman
> http://www.AerospaceSoftware.com



Tue, 02 Jul 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Derivation of PL/I (was Usenet group for PL/M language)
I have translated many programs from Pascal to PL/M and vice versa.  The
biggest problem were the use of semi colons...
Quote:


> > Yep, Pascal was likewise derived from Algol by Prof Wirth and is almost
> > identical to PL/M, another derivative.

> Pascal and PL/M have very little in common.

> > Have fun,

> > Herman
> > http://www.AerospaceSoftware.com



Thu, 04 Jul 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Derivation of PL/I (was Usenet group for PL/M language)

Quote:


> > Yep, Pascal was likewise derived from Algol by Prof Wirth and is almost
> > identical to PL/M, another derivative.

> Pascal and PL/M have very little in common.

> > Have fun,

> > Herman
> > http://www.AerospaceSoftware.com

Heck, Pascal and PL/M, along with C, are from the same school of
language design.  If you want to see something different, look at
Smalltalk, Lisp, or Forth.  These languages share little in common with
Algol.  That is why they more difficult to learn than a yet another
variation on the Algol theme language such as Java.

Mark



Thu, 04 Jul 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Derivation of PL/I (was Usenet group for PL/M language)

Quote:



> > > Yep, Pascal was likewise derived from Algol by Prof Wirth and is almost
> > > identical to PL/M, another derivative.

> > Pascal and PL/M have very little in common.

> > > Have fun,

> > > Herman
> > > http://www.*-*-*.com/

> Heck, Pascal and PL/M, along with C, are from the same school of
> language design.  If you want to see something different, look at
> Smalltalk, Lisp, or Forth.  These languages share little in common with
> Algol.  That is why they more difficult to learn than a yet another
> variation on the Algol theme language such as Java.

Sorry, but I'll have to disagree with you on this. IMHO, Lisp and Forth
were easier to learn than C and Java... (Don't know Smalltalk... yet.)
I'm sure it depends on which one you learned first. If you learned C
first, and learned it well enough to be comfortable, Lisp probably
seemed so bizarre that you had to totally readjust you mind to
understand it. But if you started out with something Lisp-like (for
example, I read The Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs
before I learned a{*filter*} of C), Lisp's simplicity and elegance will seem
natural to you.

Joe



Fri, 05 Jul 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Derivation of PL/I (was Usenet group for PL/M language)

Quote:

> Lisp's simplicity and elegance

I have often wondered whether C, C++ and many other languages were
expressly designed to make sinple things more complicated, in order to
keep newcomers out...


Fri, 05 Jul 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Derivation of PL/I (was Usenet group for PL/M language)

Quote:


> > Lisp's simplicity and elegance

> I have often wondered whether C, C++ and many other languages were
> expressly designed to make sinple things more complicated, in order to
> keep newcomers out...

That just reminded me of that hoax interview with Bjarne Stroustrup I
saw once... Did you see it? An excerpt:

Stroustrup:  Well, it's been long enough, now, and I believe most
             people have figured out for themselves that C++ is a waste
             of time but, I must say, it's taken them a lot longer than
I
             thought it would.

Interviewer:  So how exactly did you do it?

Stroustrup:  It was only supposed to be a joke, I never thought
             people would take the book seriously. Anyone with half a
             brain can see that C++ programming is counter-intuitive,
             illogical and inefficient.

The rest is at http://www.wosource.com/bjarne_stroustrop.html , in case
you're interested in a good laugh... I guess the reason it's so funny is
that it's so true...



Fri, 05 Jul 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Derivation of PL/I (was Usenet group for PL/M language)
Quote:


> >> Personally, I'm getting bored with all these Algol type languages.  It
> >> is high time that somebody create something truly new; something better
> >> than visual BASIC...

> > Why does it have to be new to be better than Visual Basic (, C, Java,
> > Pascal...)?

> > Lisp has been around for 40+ years...

> Smalltalk's been around a while, too.  Quite different than Algol-type
> languages...  ;-\

Not to forget prolog. I'd a stint at it during studying. Really nice once
(and if) you get the hang of it.

Greetings!
Volker
--
Hi! I'm a signature virus! Copy me into your signature file to help me spread!



Fri, 05 Jul 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Derivation of PL/I (was Usenet group for PL/M language)

Quote:

> > > Why does it have to be new to be better than Visual Basic (, C, Java,
> > > Pascal...)?

> > > Lisp has been around for 40+ years...

> > Smalltalk's been around a while, too.  Quite different than Algol-type
> > languages...  ;-\
> Not to forget prolog. I'd a stint at it during studying. Really nice once
> (and if) you get the hang of it.

Anyone remembers CDL ? Kinda clever, having no core ...

Zoltan

--
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| ** To reach me write to zoltan in the domain of bendor com au ** |
+--------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| Zoltan Kocsi                   |   I don't believe in miracles   |  
| Bendor Research Pty. Ltd.      |   but I rely on them.           |
+--------------------------------+---------------------------------+



Sat, 06 Jul 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 Derivation of PL/I (was Usenet group for PL/M language)
Hi!
Quote:
> I have often wondered whether C, C++ and many other languages were
> expressly designed to make sinple things more complicated, in order to
> keep newcomers out...

But I think, that C is a simpiest language. ;-)
--
                                        Alexander

---Renewed shall be blade that was broken---



Tue, 23 Jul 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 
 [ 43 post ]  Go to page: [1] [2] [3]

 Relevant Pages 

1. Derivation of PL/I (was Usenet group for PL/M language)

2. Usenet group for PL/M language

3. Usenet group for PL/M language

4. Usenet group for PL/M language

5. Usenet group for PL/M language

6. Usenet group for PL/M language

7. Derivation of PL/I

8. Derivation of PL/I

9. Derivation of PL/I

10. Logo Komeniusz PL (Logo Comenius PL)

11. Mapping local files to FILE declarations in PL/I with IBM VisualAge PL./I for Windows

12. Difference PL/1 PL/I

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software