Why not try PL/I ? 
Author Message
 Why not try PL/I ?


        >Having just been told that the Ada cross-compiler that my company purchased
        >three years ago is discontinued and will not be supported, I am not
        >surprised that Ada is not yet a popular language. I had expected better of
        >our 'reputable' supplier but I should have known better and stuck with C!
        >With such an unstable supplier-base, users will stick with the lower
        >cost/better supported languages.

        >PK

You might like to try IBM's PL/I on the workstation
(OS/2, Windows NT, AIX).

It's got a considerable lot more available in it than C,
is less error-prone, and is a reliable product.

Those systems also have development tools, including a
great live-parsing editor LPEX.



Sat, 29 Apr 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Why not try PL/I ?

Quote:

>Having just been told that the Ada cross-compiler that my company purchased
>>three years ago is discontinued and will not be supported, I am not
>>surprised that Ada is not yet a popular language. I had expected better of
>>our 'reputable' supplier but I should have known better and stuck with C!
>>With such an unstable supplier-base, users will stick with the lower
>>cost/better supported languages.

If you use some major platforms (e.g. many Unix variants, Windows NT, OS/2, and
others I don't remember), you may want to try GNAT, a high-quality validated
Ada 95 compiler (including all Annexes), for which commercial support from
the authors is available (the system is avtively developed). You can use the
public version (which is complete, not somehow crippled), though if you
intend to get a support contract later, it may be useful to contact their
support already in the evaluation phase, since customers can usually get a
newer version (reasonable since they get full support in case of problems).
http://www.gnat.com/

--
GiS - Gesellschaft fuer integrierte Systemplanung mbH
Marc Wachowitz                  Tel. +49-6201-503-38
Junkersstr. 2                   Fax  +49-6201-503-66



Sat, 29 Apr 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Why not try PL/I ?



        >>Having just been told that the Ada cross-compiler that my company purchased
        >>>three years ago is discontinued and will not be supported, I am not
        >>>surprised that Ada is not yet a popular language. I had expected better of
        >>>our 'reputable' supplier but I should have known better and stuck with C!
        >>>With such an unstable supplier-base, users will stick with the lower
        >>>cost/better supported languages.

        >If you use some major platforms (e.g. many Unix variants, Windows NT, OS/2, and
        >others I don't remember), you may want to try GNAT, a high-quality validated
        >Ada 95 compiler (including all Annexes), for which commercial support from
        >the authors is available (the system is avtively developed). You can use the
        >public version (which is complete, not somehow crippled), though if you
        >intend to get a support contract later, it may be useful to contact their
        >support already in the evaluation phase, since customers can usually get a
        >newer version (reasonable since they get full support in case of problems).
        >http://www.gnat.com/

PL/I has full commercial facilities support (including full
decimal arithmetic, commercial I/O facilities), and full
interrupt-handling support, as well as all the other things
that we expect from this excellent language.

It also has a number of vendors supporting unix, mainframes, Windows,
OS/2, and AIX platforms, and so on.

        >Marc Wachowitz                  Tel. +49-6201-503-38



Sun, 30 Apr 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Why not try PL/I ?

Quote:

>IBM's PL/1 on NT is excelletnt. However the pricing is higher than most
>people are willing to pay (~ $700.00 for the profiessional addition which
>contains a DB2 and CICS pre compiler) I believe there is a developer
>addition that is somewhat less expensive.

Although it's an excellent language, IBM long ago decided they would
rather sell 1,000 copies at $700 than 100,000 copies at $70.  This may
be related to the occasional "Gee, I wonder why _everybody_ doesn't
use PL/I ?"

IMN-S-HO, PL/I could have waxed C*B*L in its infancy and made C and
its variants another big yawn had IBM gone the other way.  Ah, well,
there's always REXX...

Frank Clarke
Tampa Area REXX Programmers' Alliance
Member of the REXX Language Association
Join us at http://www.rexxla.org
(Remove the currency symbol before replying.)



Tue, 09 May 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Why not try PL/I ?

IBM's PL/1 on NT is excelletnt. However the pricing is higher than most
people are willing to pay (~ $700.00 for the profiessional addition which
contains a DB2 and CICS pre compiler) I believe there is a developer
addition that is somewhat less expensive.

-Sol



Tue, 09 May 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Why not try PL/I ?

Actually, IBM attempted for PL/I to "wax" the 5-letter c-word programming
language ( and fortran and Lisp as well), and its PL/I was BUNDLED (read
"FREE") software with the S360 systems in the late 60s.
Several major companies (Sears for one) bet their IS business on this "new
programming language", and most got out of the PL/I business almost
immediately. Why? Because the compiler that IBM delivered produced such
inefficient, buggy code that no one could get their software to work.
(I interviewed at Sears in 1971, and they were looking for ASSEMBLER
programmers because PL/I had failed them, and IBM was trying very hard to
get out of the COBOL business, so their COBOL support was not too hot).

PL/I was definitely IBM's "language of the future". I believe that the
IS community was not ready to deal with a language of PL/I's elegance and
power, and the hardware was not really up to the job either. Memory was still
way to expensive, as was disk. Also, the 360 was not a stack-architectured
machine, and if any programming language needs a stack, PL/I is the one.

--
Jay McFadyen
Development Tools and Infrastructure, C2PSD, Ford Motor Company

(313) 33-73359



Fri, 12 May 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 
 [ 6 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. try:else: w/o except: - why not?

2. Why not use PL/I?

3. Why _not_ use PL/I?

4. Why not use PL/I ?

5. WHY NOT USE PL/I (regular post)

6. Why not use PL/I ? (regular post)

7. Why *not* use PL/I (regular post)

8. Why *not* use PL/I? -- (regular posting)

9. It's not PL/1, it's PL/I

10. It's not PL/1, it's PL/I

11. try gfdg try kuiou try gsdfas try

12. Enterprise Edition - Why/Why not???

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software