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=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=AC_FROM_MANY_DOTS,BAYES_00
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,5faad1722103f6a7
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!cyclone1.gnilink.net!spamkiller2.gnilink.net!gnilink.net!nwrdny02.gnilink.net.POSTED!0f19ed38!not-for-mail
From: "Frank J. Lhota" <NOSPAM.lhota.adarose@verizon.net>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
References: <90Stc.15309$be.3117@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>
 <40b86431$0$186$edfadb0f@dread11.news.tele.dk> <40B888E0.5040707@noplace.com>
 <opr8rj1cao5afhvo@news.verizon.net> <40B8C86A.3050302@noplace.com>
 <uu0xyl5eu.fsf@obry.org> <junvc.97793$tb4.3987814@news20.bellglobal.com>
 <40BE6BFD.8030305@noplace.com> <opr8zushje5afhvo@garuda.mshome.net>
 <40BF141F.8020001@noplace.com>
 <i1Qvc.777$uX2.380@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>
 <40C38E7C.64564F@notes.udayton.edu> <oenv7hhc.fsf@pop-server.bigpond.net.au>
 <hp9xc.6245$uX2.2245@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>
 <Nplyc.52642$8k4.1169496@news20.bellglobal.com>
Subject: Re: 7E7 Flight Controls Electronics (COBOL Popularity)
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409
Message-ID: <O8pyc.15601$mz.14513@nwrdny02.gnilink.net>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 21:05:50 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 141.154.58.140
X-Complaints-To: abuse@verizon.net
X-Trace: nwrdny02.gnilink.net 1086987950 141.154.58.140 (Fri,
 11 Jun 2004 17:05:50 EDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 17:05:50 EDT
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:1407
Date: 2004-06-11T21:05:50+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Warren W. Gay VE3WWG" <ve3wwg@cogeco.ca> wrote in message
news:Nplyc.52642$8k4.1169496@news20.bellglobal.com...
> PL/I had a number of whizbang features (for the time),
> but they didn't exactly pander to the real business needs
> (I don't recall if the full PL/I language supported the
> picture formatting or not). Certainly one of PL/I's
> downfalls, was the shear size of the language, for the
> time.

They certainly did. PL/1 was designed to fill the needs of both the COBOL
and FORTRAN markets, so they incorporated the best features of both
languages. The PL/1 record declarations were clearly modeled after their
COBOL counterparts.