Usenet group for PL/M language 
Author Message
 Usenet group for PL/M language

Quote:

> I think that this is Programming Language for Micros.
> It was based on PL/I, but is a dialect.

> The appropriate newsgroup would be comp.lang.pl1

  PL/1 was developed by IBM for financial applications and PL/M by
Intel for microprocessors (embedded PL/M 51, PL/M x86, ). I think
this way is wrong, PL/1 and PL/M has only confuse conincidence in
the name.

Best Regards from Switzerland
Petar Ristanovic
http://www.*-*-*.com/
----------------------------------------------------------------------



Sat, 29 Apr 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Usenet group for PL/M language



Quote:

>    >Hello,
>    >  Does anybody know if there are one usenet group for PL/M
language?
>    >The projects in PL/M are numerous...

>    >Best regards,
>    >Petar Ristanovic

> I think that this is Programming Language for Micros.
> It was based on PL/I, but is a dialect.

> The appropriate newsgroup would be comp.lang.pl1

Hi Robin,

Some of the syntax for PL/M was based on PL/1 (as is some of the
syntax for C, believe it or not!), but PL/M is by no means at
all functionally or in any other real way a subset of PL/1.  I
haven't programmed in either language in over ten years now.

The language was developed by consultants working for Intel for
its microcomputers and starting with the 8080.  There were also
versions for the 8051, 8088/8086, and (I think) the 8096.  It
was mostly used in embedded systems.

I don't think Intel sells compilers or supports it at all
anymore.  I would really and truly hope that nobody is doing new
projects in this language, as, IMHO, C is much better in terms
of power, flexibility, and (with newer compilers) code
generation.

But I very much doubt if comp.lang.pl1 would welcome discussion
of PL/M.

Jack



Sat, 29 Apr 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Usenet group for PL/M language

<snip>

Quote:

> The language was developed by consultants working for Intel for
> its microcomputers and starting with the 8080.  There were also
> versions for the 8051, 8088/8086, and (I think) the 8096.  It
> was mostly used in embedded systems.

> I don't think Intel sells compilers or supports it at all
> anymore.  I would really and truly hope that nobody is doing new
> projects in this language, as, IMHO, C is much better in terms
> of power, flexibility, and (with newer compilers) code
> generation.

<snip>

 Not sure that all of of our PL/M customers would agree - Yes, there are
still users programming in PL/M51 - we have sold ICE tools to them.
 Some also link their legacy PL/M libs with our Mod51 compiler output.

 Many refuse to use C.

 Part of this is familiarity, part is code version control / stability
issue.

(Age alone is no reason to obsolete anything, just look at the C51
itself - nearly
two decades old, and still outperforms many brash, new cpus !)

 As for code generation, take a peek at how your C compilers handle
BOOLEAN
expressions, and the baggage associated with 3 Byte pointers,
printf's......

 At the risk of generalising, PL/M is something of a Pascal subset, and
Modula-2 is a Pascal superset so PL/M migration to Modula-2 is easier
than PL/M to C.

 To assist migration, we have PL/M51 to Mod51 converters, and our
linkers/de{*filter*}s
support Intel's OMF format.

--
======= Manufacturers of Serious Design Tools for uC and PLD  =========
= Optimising Modula-2 Structured Text compilers for ALL 80X51 variants
= Reusable object modules, for i2c, SPI and SPL bus interfaces
= Safe, Readable & Fast code - Step up from Assembler and C
= Emulators / Programmers for ATMEL 89C1051, 2051, 89C51 89S8252 89C55
= *NEW* Bondout ICE for 89C51/89C52/89C55 , OptoISP for 89S, 90S series.



Sat, 29 Apr 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Usenet group for PL/M language


        >Hello,
        >  Does anybody know if there are one usenet group for PL/M language?
        >The projects in PL/M are numerous...

        >Best regards,
        >Petar Ristanovic

I think that this is Programming Language for Micros.
It was based on PL/I, but is a dialect.

The appropriate newsgroup would be comp.lang.pl1



Sat, 29 Apr 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Usenet group for PL/M language

Quote:

> The language was developed by consultants working for Intel for
> its microcomputers and starting with the 8080.  There were also
> versions for the 8051, 8088/8086, and (I think) the 8096.  It
> was mostly used in embedded systems.

  The 286/386 version was also developed. With very big projects.
I know firms that have 25 engineers for maintenance on one project!!!

Quote:
> I don't think Intel sells compilers or supports it at all
> anymore.  I would really and truly hope that nobody is doing new
> projects in this language, as, IMHO, C is much better in terms
> of power, flexibility, and (with newer compilers) code
> generation.

  Since a few years Intel not sells or supports PL/M line.

Quote:
> But I very much doubt if comp.lang.pl1 would welcome discussion
> of PL/M.

  With themes like "PL/1 to cobol converter"? :(((

Best regards,
Petar Ristanovic
----------------------------------------------------------------------
   Petar Ristanovic                        Tel. + 41 (0)1 833 07 57
   Ristanovic CASE                         Fax  + 41 (0)1 833 06 14

   CH-8304 Wallisellen                WEB: http://www.RistanCASE.ch
----------------------------------------------------------------------



Sat, 29 Apr 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Usenet group for PL/M language


Quote:




>>        >Hello,
>>        >  Does anybody know if there are one usenet group for PL/M
>language?

>The language was developed by consultants working for Intel for
>its microcomputers and starting with the 8080.  There were also
>versions for the 8051, 8088/8086, and (I think) the 8096.  It
>was mostly used in embedded systems.

More specifically, PL/M and its first compiler were originally developed
by the late Gary Kildall (who also developed the CP/M operating system, and
the BIOS idea which persists to this day in PCs).

PL/I derivatives were a popular exercise in the early 70s.  The full
language was an unwieldy monster.  Even IBM built a derivative called
PL/S which they used to develop various software.  McKeeman, Horning, and
Wortman's book A Compiler Generator detailed an ultimately self-compiling
cross compiler for another derivative called XPL.



Sat, 29 Apr 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Usenet group for PL/M language



Quote:





> >>   >Hello,
> >>   >  Does anybody know if there are one usenet group for
PL/M
> >language?

> >The language was developed by consultants working for Intel
for
> >its microcomputers and starting with the 8080.  There were
also
> >versions for the 8051, 8088/8086, and (I think) the 8096.  It
> >was mostly used in embedded systems.

> More specifically, PL/M and its first compiler were originally
developed
> by the late Gary Kildall (who also developed the CP/M

operating system, and

Quote:
> the BIOS idea which persists to this day in PCs).

If I remember correctly, Kildall was one of the members of the
team who developed the language, but not the sole developer.
The CP/M 80 parameter passing convention in 8080/Z80 registers
for system calls was the same as PL/M 80, even though CP/M was
written in 8080 assembly and not PL/M.

At one time using a PL/M compiler on CP/M, I could write CP/M
function calls directly in CP/M with no assembly language
binders to translate arguments on the way in or the return value
on the way out.

Jack



Sun, 30 Apr 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Usenet group for PL/M language



Quote:

>The language was developed by consultants working for Intel for
>its microcomputers and starting with the 8080.  There were also
>versions for the 8051, 8088/8086, and (I think) the 8096.  It
>was mostly used in embedded systems.

Also for the 80386 and finally there was a rmx4win that allowed you to
run DOS & windows 3/3.1 on top of iRMX also supported PLM but intel then
announced first that they were dropping PLM in favour of thier own C
compiler and later, (once they found out how much work a good C compiler
was?), that they would sell RMX4WIN libraries for several well
established C compilers, IIRC Watcom & Borland were mentioned.
Quote:
>I don't think Intel sells compilers or supports it at all
>anymore.  I would really and truly hope that nobody is doing new
>projects in this language, as, IMHO, C is much better in terms
>of power, flexibility, and (with newer compilers) code
>generation.

Intel sold of RMX & PLM some time ago, but I can not recall the name of
the company conserned, (they were at this years embeded computer show at
Olimpia, (London), but they don't call the OS RMX any more, I don't
think that they do a PLM now but they can probably still supply the
older versions.

As to the origins & syntax I have always thought that PLM was an attempt
to write C but a group of mad pascal programmers, (no you don't have to
be mad to program in pascal!)

--
Steve Barnes



Sun, 30 Apr 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Usenet group for PL/M language



Quote:



>>The language was developed by consultants working for Intel for
>>its microcomputers and starting with the 8080.  There were also
>>versions for the 8051, 8088/8086, and (I think) the 8096.  It
>>was mostly used in embedded systems.

>Also for the 80386 and finally there was a rmx4win that allowed you to
>run DOS & windows 3/3.1 on top of iRMX also supported PLM but intel then
>announced first that they were dropping PLM in favour of thier own C
>compiler and later, (once they found out how much work a good C compiler
>was?), that they would sell RMX4WIN libraries for several well
>established C compilers, IIRC Watcom & Borland were mentioned.
>>I don't think Intel sells compilers or supports it at all
>>anymore.  I would really and truly hope that nobody is doing new
>>projects in this language, as, IMHO, C is much better in terms
>>of power, flexibility, and (with newer compilers) code
>>generation.
>Intel sold of RMX & PLM some time ago, but I can not recall the name of
>the company conserned, (they were at this years embeded computer show at
>Olimpia, (London), but they don't call the OS RMX any more, I don't
>think that they do a PLM now but they can probably still supply the
>older versions.

Intel sold iRMX to Radisys who still supports and sells it along with some
new stuff that they have developed for NT.  As far as I know, it still
contains a PL/M compiler (don't know about the NT stuff).

- Show quoted text -

Quote:

>As to the origins & syntax I have always thought that PLM was an attempt
>to write C but a group of mad pascal programmers, (no you don't have to
>be mad to program in pascal!)

>--
>Steve Barnes



Sun, 30 Apr 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Usenet group for PL/M language

Quote:



> >The language was developed by consultants working for Intel for
> >its microcomputers and starting with the 8080.  There were also
> >versions for the 8051, 8088/8086, and (I think) the 8096.  It
> >was mostly used in embedded systems.

> Also for the 80386 and finally there was a rmx4win that allowed you to
> run DOS & windows 3/3.1 on top of iRMX also supported PLM but intel then
> announced first that they were dropping PLM in favour of thier own C
> compiler and later, (once they found out how much work a good C compiler
> was?), that they would sell RMX4WIN libraries for several well
> established C compilers, IIRC Watcom & Borland were mentioned.
> >I don't think Intel sells compilers or supports it at all
> >anymore.  I would really and truly hope that nobody is doing new
> >projects in this language, as, IMHO, C is much better in terms
> >of power, flexibility, and (with newer compilers) code
> >generation.
> Intel sold of RMX & PLM some time ago, but I can not recall the name of
> the company conserned, (they were at this years embeded computer show at
> Olimpia, (London), but they don't call the OS RMX any more, I don't
> think that they do a PLM now but they can probably still supply the
> older versions.

> As to the origins & syntax I have always thought that PLM was an attempt
> to write C but a group of mad pascal programmers, (no you don't have to
> be mad to program in pascal!)

> --
> Steve Barnes

Intel sold iRMX to Radisys (www.radisys.com).  I guess PL/M went with
iRMX,
at least PL/M still ships with "iRMX for Windows".  I always liked PL/M.
It's treatment of pointers seemed a lot cleaner than in C. It is nice
however
to have runtime library support, and PL/M didn't carry that concept very
far at all.  We still have about 1% legacy PL/M code (that I wrote!) in
our
current products, still doing what it was written to do 10 or 12 years
ago.

--
**************************
"Never use absolutes."
**************************



Sun, 30 Apr 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Usenet group for PL/M language

Quote:

> Intel sold iRMX to Radisys who still supports and sells it along with some
> new stuff that they have developed for NT.  As far as I know, it still
> contains a PL/M compiler (don't know about the NT stuff).

  Yes, I know three iRMX users group (IRUG) worldwide (USA, Europe,
Japan). The last conference was last week in Paris. The web links
are available from our web site "http://www.RistanCASE.ch/da-plm".

  But how can we open PL/M group on usenet? Who can do it? Where must I
write or ...?

Regards,
Petar Ristanovic
----------------------------------------------------------------------
   Petar Ristanovic                        Tel. + 41 (0)1 833 07 57
   Ristanovic CASE                         Fax  + 41 (0)1 833 06 14

   CH-8304 Wallisellen                WEB: http://www.RistanCASE.ch
----------------------------------------------------------------------



Sun, 30 Apr 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Usenet group for PL/M language

|> As to the origins & syntax I have always thought that PLM was an attempt
|> to write C but a group of mad pascal programmers, (no you don't have to
|> be mad to program in pascal!)

But it certainly helps!

Regards :-)

--
Chris Engebretson --- Hughes STX Corporation | Ph#: (605)594-6829
USGS EROS Data Center, Sioux Falls, SD 57198 | Fax: (605)594-6940

Opinions here are not those of Hughes Aircraft, STX, or the USGS.



Sun, 30 Apr 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Usenet group for PL/M language



        >> I think that this is Programming Language for Micros.
        >> It was based on PL/I, but is a dialect.
        >>
        >> The appropriate newsgroup would be comp.lang.pl1

        >  PL/1 was developed by IBM for financial applications

PL/I was developed as a language for commercial, scientific,
engineering and systems programming applications.  In other
words, it it a general purpose programming language, suitable
for a wide variety of applications.

        > and PL/M by
        >Intel for microprocessors (embedded PL/M 51, PL/M x86, ). I think
        >this way is wrong, PL/1 and PL/M has only confuse conincidence in
        >the name.

        >Best Regards from Switzerland
        >Petar Ristanovic



Sun, 30 Apr 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Usenet group for PL/M language

<snip>
: Intel sold of RMX & PLM some time ago, but I can not recall the name of
: the company conserned, (they were at this years embeded computer show at
: Olimpia, (London), but they don't call the OS RMX any more, I don't
: think that they do a PLM now but they can probably still supply the
: older versions.
<snip>
It is Radisys that now owns IRMX and they are using it as an RTOS with
Windows NT as a task under it in an attempt to wedge NT into real-time
applications.

--

Snail: PO Box 7571 Ann Arbor MI 48107-7571 USA
Phone: (313)747-9170 (voice) (313)747-8478 (fax)



Sun, 30 Apr 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Usenet group for PL/M language


Quote:


>> Intel sold iRMX to Radisys who still supports and sells it along with some
>> new stuff that they have developed for NT.  As far as I know, it still
>> contains a PL/M compiler (don't know about the NT stuff).

>  Yes, I know three iRMX users group (IRUG) worldwide (USA, Europe,
>Japan). The last conference was last week in Paris. The web links
>are available from our web site "http://www.RistanCASE.ch/da-plm".

>  But how can we open PL/M group on usenet? Who can do it? Where must I
>write or ...?

You might want to ask in comp.os.cpm, where you are likely to find
people who know PL/M (as CP/M is written in it).


Sun, 30 Apr 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 
 [ 22 post ]  Go to page: [1] [2]

 Relevant Pages 

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

2. Derivation of PL/I (was 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. Number of posts to Usenet language groups

8. How to start a usenet news group ?

9. The BITNET and Usenet Forth Groups

10. VLSI usenet group

11. More usenet usage statistics, by programming language

12. ANN: PL/I for Palm Interest Group

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software