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: f43e6,5ac12f5a60b1bfe X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public X-Google-Thread: 101deb,f96f757d5586710a X-Google-Attributes: gid101deb,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,5ac12f5a60b1bfe X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Richard Riehle Subject: PL/I Versus Ada (Was: Arianne ...) Date: 1996/08/18 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 175133546 references: <4t9vdg$jfb@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au> <4tiu6e$kpm@news2.cais.com> <4up8pi$lvi@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au> <32106B34.57DB@lmtas.lmco.com> content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII organization: National University, San Diego mime-version: 1.0 reply-to: Richard Riehle newsgroups: comp.software-eng,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.pl1 Date: 1996-08-18T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: I changed the caption for the subject since this thread has become more one of advocacy than issues related to Arianne. 1) I have heard a rumor that the first Alsys Ada compiler was written in PL/I. True or False? 2) If PL/I is so excellent, why was it rejected during the evaluation process that led to the development of Ada? For that matter, why was C rejected? 3) I have heard that there is an object-oriented version of PL/I under development. True or False? When? Language debates are almost always non-productive. But PL/I was one of the first languages designed with many of the same goals we attribute to Ada. Reflecting on PL/I in the context of those goals might be useful in a better understanding of why we choose Ada rather than PL/I for software that absolutely, positively must not fail. Richard Riehle