From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,b19fa62fdce575f9 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1994-12-12 16:07:21 PST Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Path: bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!osi-east2.es.net!cronkite.nersc.gov!dancer.ca.sandia.gov!overload.lbl.gov!dog.ee.lbl.gov!newshub.nosc.mil!news!mshapiro From: mshapiro@nosc.mil (Michael D Shapiro) Subject: PL/1 vs PL/I (Re: Why don't large companies use Ada?) Message-ID: <1994Dec8.175139.18849@nosc.mil> Sender: news@nosc.mil Organization: NCCOSC RDT&E Division, San Diego, CA References: <9412061800.AA26582@eurocontrol.de> Date: Thu, 8 Dec 1994 17:51:39 GMT Date: 1994-12-08T17:51:39+00:00 List-Id: In article <9412061800.AA26582@eurocontrol.de>, Bob Wells #402 wrote: >G'day, > >Here's a totally non-Ada question. > >Way back in the dim dark past while studying at (yes, and graduating from (-: ) >Uni. of NSW in Sydney I had to do some programming in PL/1. I'm sure that this >was pronounced as "pee-ell-one." I see that Robert Dewar (among others) writes >it as PL/1, yet I see that Dave Emery (along with others) writes it as PL/I. >Most of the Germans here at Eurocontrol swear "black-and-blue" that it is called >"pee-ell-eye." Yet I remember that the "eye" was supposed to be read as a Roman >numeral. > >Is my memory playing tricks? What is the correct version? > >P.S. The PL/(I1) question is a serious one, not important one, but not a joke >question either! (-: As I recall, the I is a roman numeral one and the language name is pronounced "pea-ell-one" no matter which notation scheme one uses. I believe IBM used one form and the standards activity used the other form (but I can't remember which was which; IBM probably used the "I"). It's probably worth noting that most languages don't have a version number 1. There's FORTRAN, FORTRAN II, FORTRAN IV, ... Fortran 90. Or SNOBOL, SNOBOL 2, ... SNOBOL4. I suppose it's because people have enough confidence that they've got it right, only to have others find problems or improvements worthy of coming up with a new version. That theory says that PL/I (or PL/1) was just about the only programming language ever developed that the developers didn't have confidence in. -- Michael D. Shapiro, Ph.D. Internet: mshapiro@nosc.mil Code 4123, NCCOSC RDT&E Division (NRaD) San Diego CA 92152 Voice: (619) 553-4080 FAX: (619) 553-4808 DSN: 553-4080