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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: f43e6,5ac12f5a60b1bfe
X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public
X-Google-Thread: 101deb,87f6968ed41c9df1
X-Google-Attributes: gid101deb,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,5ac12f5a60b1bfe
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: rav@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au (++           robin)
Subject: Re: Ada versus PL/I (was: Re: Ariane 5 - not an exception?)
Date: 1996/09/07
Message-ID: <50pcn5$evv@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 178888650
expires: 15 November 1996 00:00:00 GMT
references: <Pine.GSO.3.92.960831192310.8449A-100000@nunic.nu.edu>
 <50ghaj$903@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au> <dewar.841841335@schonberg>
organization: Comp Sci, RMIT, Melbourne, Australia
newsgroups: comp.software-eng,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.pl1
nntp-posting-user: rav
Date: 1996-09-07T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


	dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) writes:

	>robin said
	>"---The first edition c. 1966 of IBM's PL/I Reference Manual
	>for the S/360 (PL/I-F compiler) called it "PL/I"."

	>Yes, of course that is true. But I assume you are aware of the NPL
	>papers that preceded this renaming of the language ...

---Indeed.  I said so in a previous post in this thread:

"NPL is not in dispute.  It's well
known that the early name of the language was NPL for New Programing
Language."

   It's also mentioned in the FAQ for comp.lang.pl1, in the history
section.