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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 101deb,87f6968ed41c9df1
X-Google-Attributes: gid101deb,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,5ac12f5a60b1bfe
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: f43e6,5ac12f5a60b1bfe
X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public
From: shmuel@os2bbs.com
Subject: Re: Ada versus PL/I (was: Re: Ariane 5 - not an exception?)
Date: 1996/09/17
Message-ID: <51l0rm$5lq@news1.mnsinc.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 181029711
distribution: inet
references: <Pine.GSO.3.92.960831192310.8449A-100000@nunic.nu.edu>
 <50dkud$t7h@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au> <50drec$e7h@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au>
 <50g701$gah@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au>
organization: Atid/2
reply-to: shmuel.metz@os2bbs.com
newsgroups: comp.software-eng,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.pl1
Date: 1996-09-17T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


In <50g701$gah@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au>, rav@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au (++  robin) writes:
>
>   He was claiming that PL/I was called "PL/1" before it
>was called PL/I.  I pointed out that the first editions
>of IBM's PL/I manuals called it "PL/I".
>

Hardly relevant; that manual was printed well after the joint IBM/SHARE report. BTW, do you remember the truly 
ugly name that IBM picked between NPL and MPPL?