Path: csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!feeder.usenetexpress.com!feeder-in1.iad1.usenetexpress.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news.iecc.com!.POSTED.news.iecc.com!nerds-end From: "Robin Vowels" Newsgroups: comp.compilers Subject: Re: language design after Algol 60 Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2018 14:11:32 +1000 Organization: Compilers Central Lines: 38 Sender: news@iecc.com Approved: comp.compilers@iecc.com Message-ID: <18-04-064@comp.compilers> References: <49854345-f940-e82a-5c35-35078c4189d5@gkc.org.uk> <18-03-103@comp.compilers> <18-03-042@comp.compilers> <18-03-047@comp.compilers> <18-03-075@comp.compilers> <18-03-079@comp.compilers> <18-03-101@comp.compilers> <18-04-002@comp.compilers> <18-04-003@comp.compilers> <18-04-004@comp.compilers> <18-04-024@comp.compilers> <18-04-034@comp.compilers> <18-04-041@comp.compilers> <18-04-046@comp.compilers> <18-04-050@comp.compilers> <18-04-063@comp.compilers> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8"; reply-type=response Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: gal.iecc.com; posting-host="news.iecc.com:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:676f:7373:6970"; logging-data="2488"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@iecc.com" Keywords: PL/I, history, comment Posted-Date: 14 Apr 2018 15:04:07 EDT X-submission-address: compilers@iecc.com X-moderator-address: compilers-request@iecc.com X-FAQ-and-archives: http://compilers.iecc.com Xref: csiph.com comp.compilers:2076 From: "Martin Ward" Sent: Friday, April 13, 2018 11:10 PM > The IBM Language Reference for Enterprise PL/I for z/OS is 862 pages. The IBM PL/I for OS/2 Language Reference is 491 pages plus 121 pages for the built-in functions, published 1994. This reference includes a number of new language features. The language references also include a number of example programs. > E.W.Dijkstra wrote in his ACM Turing Lecture 1972: > > "Finally, although the subject is not a pleasant one, I must > mention PL/1, a programming language for which the defining > documentation is of a frightening size and complexity. > Using PL/1 must be like flying a plane with 7000 buttons, > switches and handles to manipulate in the cockpit. Dijkstra's comment is nonsense. It seems that he couldn't even spell the name of the language. [assuming that the quotation is literally correct] > I absolutely fail to see how we can keep our growing programs > firmly within our intellectual grip when by its sheer baroqueness > the programming language -- our basic tool, mind you! -- already > escapes our intellectual control." Others seem to have mastered it, but not Dijkstra, apparently. [Considering how quickly it was designed, PL/I is not a bad language, but it definitely has parts that fit together poorly. I once tried to write a program that used arrays of 12-bit strings and the code PL/I F generated was very special, not in a good way. Per one of my previous comments, few programmers learn all of PL/I, most learn a subset adequate for the kind of programming they do. I doubt many write programs that use both recursive routines with stacks of controlled storage and decimal picture I/O. -John]