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: 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: mcfadyen@cc0192.pd9.ford.com (Jay McFadyen) Subject: Re: Ada versus PL/I (was: Re: Ariane 5 - not an exception?) Date: 1996/09/17 Message-ID: <51n1u4$pkg@cc0042.pd9.ford.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 181212673 distribution: inet references: <50dkud$t7h@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au> <50drec$e7h@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au> <50g701$gah@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au> <51l0rm$5lq@news1.mnsinc.com> organization: Ford Motor Company newsgroups: comp.software-eng,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.pl1 Date: 1996-09-17T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In <50g701$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". > There is an additional issue here. Not is there the question of what it was called, but also how it was used. In the Multics environment - still probably the best use of PL/I that anyone knows of - the PL/I compiler was named pl1. Note, no slash, no uppercase (all Multics commands are lower case and case sensitive) and no capital "I". As you can see, I am willing to call the Language PL/I, but I wish I had a nickel for every time I invoked the compiler: pl1 fred.pl1 Can we call a halt this fruitless, silly argument? -- Jay McFadyen Development Tools and Infrastructure, C2PSD, Ford Motor Company mcfadyen@cadcam.pd9.ford.com or JMCFADYE (313) 33-73359