Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #163878 > unrolled thread
| Started by | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-05-23 16:40 -0700 |
| Last post | 2016-05-25 15:07 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 598 — 36 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers
PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-23 16:40 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-24 14:06 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-05-24 14:22 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-24 16:39 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-25 07:47 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-25 15:00 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-25 13:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-25 13:30 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-05-25 16:12 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-25 15:13 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-25 16:19 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-25 16:33 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-26 12:07 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-26 16:22 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-28 13:17 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-05-28 15:29 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising mausg@mail.com - 2016-05-29 10:03 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-29 07:26 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-29 15:16 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-31 17:44 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-31 19:22 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-01 07:41 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-01 10:49 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-01 06:36 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 11:13 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-02 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-05-29 15:30 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-29 23:56 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-29 07:26 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-05-26 14:24 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-05-26 06:54 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-05-26 06:50 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Larry <lelmore76@gmail.com> - 2016-06-19 15:29 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-05-25 08:45 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-05-25 17:58 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-05-25 22:04 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-26 00:31 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-26 10:07 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-29 17:55 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-05-26 15:57 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-05-26 20:00 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-27 11:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-05-27 15:49 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-27 20:28 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-28 13:18 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-28 17:53 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-29 13:38 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-29 16:33 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-05-31 17:26 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-31 18:52 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Michael LeVine <mlevinespmfltr@redshift.com> - 2016-05-31 14:10 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-01 12:57 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 11:13 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-05-31 22:19 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-01 07:53 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-01 12:08 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-01 11:10 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-01 10:22 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 11:13 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-02 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-03 13:51 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-05 17:38 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-05 14:22 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-07 16:14 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-06 16:15 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 14:11 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-07 02:52 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:52 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-01 17:03 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising David Wade <dave.g4ugm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 11:31 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-02 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-02 15:09 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-03 16:41 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-03 15:49 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-03 10:06 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:45 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:45 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 16:18 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-05 23:26 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-06 18:16 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-07 12:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:52 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:28 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-04 02:43 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-04 11:08 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-05 23:14 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:59 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:52 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-05 16:39 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 21:12 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-05 17:18 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:53 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-08 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-09 08:26 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-09 12:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-17 03:36 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-17 12:53 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-05 10:20 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-06 09:04 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-06 10:23 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-07 12:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-07 08:59 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-08 12:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-08 15:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-08 15:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-09 12:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-08 10:34 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-08 11:13 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-09 12:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-09 16:01 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-09 10:39 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-09 10:00 -0700
Dynamic adaptive resource management (was: PL/I advertising "Jack Myers" <jmyers@n6wuz.net> - 2016-06-09 08:45 -0700
Re: Dynamic adaptive resource management (was: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-09 10:19 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-07 08:36 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-06 18:17 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-06 15:06 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 23:39 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-07 10:05 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-07 10:14 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-07 10:18 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-07 12:24 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-07 16:32 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-07 22:41 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-08 11:54 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:23 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-07 02:52 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-04 07:23 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-04 13:36 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 09:58 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-05 10:41 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 12:25 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-06 09:21 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-06 09:40 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 10:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-06 10:20 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-06 13:09 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-06 13:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-06 21:40 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-06 21:03 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 21:00 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-08 06:08 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-09 08:26 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-09 09:39 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-07 16:14 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-07 22:33 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-07 20:14 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-09 05:50 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-09 07:33 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-17 03:36 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-06 09:39 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-06 12:53 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-05 17:38 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 14:19 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-07 10:02 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-07 12:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-07 12:19 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 14:00 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:54 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-02 09:23 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-02 15:10 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-02 16:41 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-02 17:58 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-02 22:31 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-02 20:37 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-03 14:09 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-03 14:32 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-04 13:18 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-04 13:57 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-03 06:59 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-03 08:33 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-02 11:00 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:58 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-01 12:59 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-01 17:43 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Michael LeVine <mlevinespmfltr@redshift.com> - 2016-06-01 13:35 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-02 08:13 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Michael LeVine <mlevinespmfltr@redshift.com> - 2016-06-02 02:13 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-24 11:30 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-24 17:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-24 20:21 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-24 18:26 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising isw <isw@witzend.com> - 2016-06-24 21:01 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-25 05:42 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-25 07:38 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-25 13:10 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-25 14:32 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-27 16:07 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-27 21:17 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-28 12:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-28 08:39 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-28 17:23 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-27 19:25 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-27 19:28 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-27 23:16 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-25 07:24 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-25 07:45 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-25 08:02 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-27 16:12 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-28 12:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-28 10:35 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-28 14:27 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-28 12:04 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-28 15:21 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-28 21:13 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-29 12:49 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-29 08:25 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-29 08:33 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-29 17:42 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-25 07:31 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-25 07:02 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-25 12:12 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-25 13:10 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-25 16:28 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-26 13:10 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-27 15:40 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-28 12:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Mike Causer <m.r.causer@goglemail.com> - 2016-06-28 22:40 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-28 22:49 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-28 20:25 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-29 10:08 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Mike Causer <m.r.causer@goglemail.com> - 2016-06-29 19:27 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-29 18:57 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-29 17:52 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-29 23:04 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising mausg@mail.com - 2016-06-30 18:27 +0000
PDP-10 ZORK [was Re: PL/I advertising] Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-27 16:20 -0400
Re: PDP-10 ZORK [was Re: PL/I advertising] sidd@situ.com (sidd) - 2016-06-28 00:22 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-01 13:47 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-02 16:46 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-02 16:45 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-01 17:42 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-01 16:09 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-02 12:57 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:57 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-02 15:17 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-02 20:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-02 13:51 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-02 22:16 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-04 02:43 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-02 20:24 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-02 13:48 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-02 20:53 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-03 13:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-03 07:50 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-03 10:36 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-03 11:38 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-03 11:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-03 21:10 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-03 11:28 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-03 12:59 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-03 05:44 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-03 05:40 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-03 10:16 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-03 07:37 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-03 17:16 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-03 17:38 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-04 06:16 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 07:12 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-04 08:52 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 14:06 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 14:46 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 16:03 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 08:25 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-05 17:50 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:39 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-03 13:30 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-03 13:27 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Andreas Eder <a_eder_muc@web.de> - 2016-06-05 10:04 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 11:47 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-02 16:41 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 20:20 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-03 09:40 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-03 17:40 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-04 10:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-04 15:40 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 16:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-04 17:59 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 19:06 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-04 12:31 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 14:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 14:50 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-05 14:13 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 16:15 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-07 12:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-07 13:24 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-05 17:38 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-05 18:44 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 21:14 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-05 23:07 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 22:22 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 16:15 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-03 16:53 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-03 17:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-03 17:37 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-03 14:19 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-03 21:21 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-03 17:04 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-04 10:54 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 15:03 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-04 12:08 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-04 16:28 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-05 10:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 11:47 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 08:51 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 13:06 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-05 16:05 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 15:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 12:11 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 21:12 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-05 06:12 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-05 09:45 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-05 07:42 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-05 13:24 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-05 10:01 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-05 18:48 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-05 14:29 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-05 14:06 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-06 19:47 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-07 12:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-07 07:58 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-06 09:30 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-06 10:13 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 10:14 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-06 12:04 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 11:27 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-06 12:45 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 11:48 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-06 13:08 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 13:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-06 14:57 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 16:17 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-06 18:21 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-06 14:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 16:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-06 09:51 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-07 16:14 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Robert Swindells <rjs@fdy2.co.uk> - 2016-06-07 20:59 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-08 07:26 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Robert Swindells <rjs@fdy2.co.uk> - 2016-06-08 12:00 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-07 15:33 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-07 18:08 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-08 12:40 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-08 09:45 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-08 19:06 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-06-08 18:17 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:50 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-05 09:56 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-05 12:39 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-05 12:28 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-05 16:02 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-06 09:27 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-04 13:28 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 21:02 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-05 03:04 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-04 22:42 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 07:20 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-05 17:38 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 21:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-06 11:13 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-04 17:26 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:07 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-04 16:28 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-04 16:39 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-04 17:39 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Lawrence Statton NK1G <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-06-04 16:51 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 22:10 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-04 18:21 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 23:02 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-04 23:57 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 07:20 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-05 09:25 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-06-05 17:38 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 08:25 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-04 13:05 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-04 20:18 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 11:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-07 22:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-09 05:49 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-09 07:03 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-05 17:42 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:32 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 08:25 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 13:04 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-05 12:11 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-05 21:08 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-06 11:13 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 16:13 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-06 10:00 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-06 18:42 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-06-05 17:53 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-06 12:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:45 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-07 16:32 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-08 11:53 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-03 22:06 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-04 13:33 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-04 14:00 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-04 17:31 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-07 13:19 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-07 15:34 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-08 00:28 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-07 20:10 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-06-04 13:14 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 15:39 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-06 13:01 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-06-03 21:21 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-03 11:14 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-03 16:45 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-03 15:12 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-03 12:56 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 16:05 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 16:09 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-09 17:27 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-10 06:58 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-10 11:42 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-16 17:07 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-17 12:53 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:52 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-29 16:41 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-29 23:44 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-29 23:50 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-05-31 17:26 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-31 16:09 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-01 16:15 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-02 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 11:13 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-06-01 13:49 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 17:34 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-02 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-04 02:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 12:47 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:45 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-04 16:23 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-05 23:19 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-06 13:35 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-06 18:12 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-07 12:11 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Rob Doyle <radioengr@gmail.com> - 2016-06-05 02:15 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-05-31 17:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-31 18:50 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 11:13 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-02 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-06-02 15:18 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-06-02 20:17 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-02 16:54 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-02 16:41 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-02 22:20 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-04 02:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:45 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2016-06-04 14:08 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-08 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-09 08:26 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-09 12:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-17 03:36 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-03 13:56 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:45 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:58 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-05-31 16:13 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:58 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-02 16:41 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-02 19:19 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-04 02:45 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-04 13:44 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-08 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-09 08:26 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-09 12:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-17 03:37 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-17 16:52 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-09 17:45 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:56 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:58 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:58 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-06-02 19:21 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-05 14:31 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-07 20:58 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-28 15:18 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-05-31 17:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:52 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:58 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-05-31 17:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-01 13:51 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 11:13 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-02 12:09 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-02 09:41 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-02 17:58 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-06-03 13:16 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising usenet@only.tnx (Questor) - 2016-06-05 07:29 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Joe Chisolm <jchisolm6@earthlink.net> - 2016-05-31 13:37 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-31 12:19 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Joe Chisolm <jchisolm6@earthlink.net> - 2016-05-31 16:29 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-01 07:04 -0400
Re: Penn Central PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-01 13:15 -0700
Re: Penn Central PL/I advertising "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-06-01 15:38 -0500
Re: Penn Central PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-06-03 13:44 -0700
Re: Penn Central PL/I advertising Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-06-03 16:40 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-26 16:22 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-05-26 20:32 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-26 18:50 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-27 11:01 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-05-27 13:36 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-05-27 15:33 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-27 16:07 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-05-27 19:20 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-27 19:53 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-05-27 20:55 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-28 15:18 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-05-28 20:25 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-31 14:39 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-05-31 14:37 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-04 22:28 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-27 10:51 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-27 06:56 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> - 2016-05-27 15:51 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-27 20:25 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-28 15:18 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-27 05:43 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-28 15:18 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-29 05:28 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-05-29 15:26 +0200
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-29 11:50 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-04 22:39 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-05-26 12:23 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-26 15:56 -0400
Re: PL/I advertising "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-06-04 22:21 -0500
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-05 05:38 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-29 17:53 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-29 18:58 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-06-30 07:20 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-30 14:27 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising "Kerr Mudd-John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2016-06-30 22:29 +0100
Re: PL/I advertising Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-06-30 22:22 +0000
Re: PL/I advertising hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-05-25 15:03 -0700
Re: PL/I advertising Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-05-25 15:07 -0700
Page 29 of 30 — ← Prev page 1 … 27 28 [29] 30 Next page →
| From | Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-26 16:22 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <1319770383.485985570.940360.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #163993 |
Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote: > Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> writes: > >> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes: >> >>> Quadibloc wrote: >> >>>> On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 5:40:26 PM UTC-6, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: >> >>>>> The story of how a single language answers the question, "Can a >>>>> young girl with no previous programming experience find happiness >> >>>> Well, there you are. This explains why PL/I never caught on, while >>>> FORTRAN and COBOL continue to this day. >> >>>> What self-respecting programmer would use a language that's designed >>>> for... girls! >> >>> Patui! What self-respecting girls would choose PL/I? >> >> Nan Detlaff and Marj Benson, to name two of my acquaintance (though >> Nan usually used BAL, since she was an OS/360 systems programmer). >> >> Nan was manager of the systems programmers at the Computer-Assisted >> Education Laboratory of the College of Education at the University of >> Texas when I was a lowly work-study lab monitor (who happened to know >> programming, which fascinated her). >> >> Marj was the manager of Financial Systems at the University of Chicago >> Computation Center who hired me as a junior programmer/analyst after I >> finished class work for my Ph. D. in another field entirely. It was >> her mandate that all non-vendor code (mostly COBOL) be written in >> PL/I. >> >> And I'd say both of them respected themselves with good reason. >> >> Make that three: My high school girlfriend, Lin Nielsen (now Cochran), >> made a good living with her library science degree and DBA skills. >> She's the one who gave me a book on programming the System/360 as a >> graduation present. >> >> PL/I rules! Just because it was ported to the VAX under VMS doesn't >> mean it's a bad language. > > Over the years, I had little respect for PL/I. Then the time came when > I had to use PL/I for a serious enhancement to existing PL/I code. The > language did not let me down. I found it quite easy to write the simple > parts with simple code and when I had to get into more sophisticated > stuff, I found the language has some nice advanced features. > > Of course it makes no difference whether the coder is wearing a dress or > a pair of slacks. I think referring to the coders sex was an attempt to > be cute. Which I found annoying. > > Pete, of course is the PL/I expert on this forum. I'd listen to his > opinion rather than the ignorant comment from the know-nothing poster > you replied to. > I haven't commented, because I may be a bit biased. Naturally I think PL/I is the greatest thing since sliced bread. To the point, I have known a number of good PL/I programmers of both sexes. It's possible to do almost anything in PL/I, simply and clearly. The only thing I have found missing relative to C is side-effects in expressions, which I think are abhorrent anyhow. Some programmers used to like COBOL because of its simplicity: there's usually only one way to do a thing, assuming it's possible at all. PL/I usually provides several ways to do a given thing. -- Pete
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-26 20:32 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <ni84d0$l26$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #164036 |
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes: > Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote: >> Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> writes: >> >>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes: >>> >>>> Quadibloc wrote: >>> >>>>> On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 5:40:26 PM UTC-6, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: >>> >>>>>> The story of how a single language answers the question, "Can a >>>>>> young girl with no previous programming experience find happiness >>> >>>>> Well, there you are. This explains why PL/I never caught on, while >>>>> FORTRAN and COBOL continue to this day. >>> >>>>> What self-respecting programmer would use a language that's designed >>>>> for... girls! >>> >>>> Patui! What self-respecting girls would choose PL/I? >>> >>> Nan Detlaff and Marj Benson, to name two of my acquaintance (though >>> Nan usually used BAL, since she was an OS/360 systems programmer). >>> >>> Nan was manager of the systems programmers at the Computer-Assisted >>> Education Laboratory of the College of Education at the University of >>> Texas when I was a lowly work-study lab monitor (who happened to know >>> programming, which fascinated her). >>> >>> Marj was the manager of Financial Systems at the University of Chicago >>> Computation Center who hired me as a junior programmer/analyst after I >>> finished class work for my Ph. D. in another field entirely. It was >>> her mandate that all non-vendor code (mostly COBOL) be written in >>> PL/I. >>> >>> And I'd say both of them respected themselves with good reason. >>> >>> Make that three: My high school girlfriend, Lin Nielsen (now Cochran), >>> made a good living with her library science degree and DBA skills. >>> She's the one who gave me a book on programming the System/360 as a >>> graduation present. >>> >>> PL/I rules! Just because it was ported to the VAX under VMS doesn't >>> mean it's a bad language. >> >> Over the years, I had little respect for PL/I. Then the time came when >> I had to use PL/I for a serious enhancement to existing PL/I code. The >> language did not let me down. I found it quite easy to write the simple >> parts with simple code and when I had to get into more sophisticated >> stuff, I found the language has some nice advanced features. >> >> Of course it makes no difference whether the coder is wearing a dress or >> a pair of slacks. I think referring to the coders sex was an attempt to >> be cute. Which I found annoying. >> >> Pete, of course is the PL/I expert on this forum. I'd listen to his >> opinion rather than the ignorant comment from the know-nothing poster >> you replied to. >> > > I haven't commented, because I may be a bit biased. Naturally I think PL/I > is the greatest thing since sliced bread. To the point, I have known a > number of good PL/I programmers of both sexes. It's possible to do almost > anything in PL/I, simply and clearly. The only thing I have found missing > relative to C is side-effects in expressions, which I think are abhorrent > anyhow. As I went through my conversion to a "PL/I is good" programmer, I'd discuss the language with other, more experienced PL/I developers. They always had one or more stories about bad PL/I features, Sorry, usually it was some deep dark, well buried trap that you could fall into. Can't remember any details. The point is, as you get to know more and more, some of that stuff is going to trip you up. I agree, PL/I can do without side effects. C is meant to be more machine oriented. Why should C worry about some clown coding: x[i] = i++; The coder may not get what he wants, but he might get what he deserves. > Some programmers used to like COBOL because of its simplicity: there's > usually only one way to do a thing, assuming it's possible at all. PL/I > usually provides several ways to do a given thing. I've done more COBOL than anything. I've never seen a business problem that couldn't be solved with a reasonable amount of COBOL. Copy paste is your friend, it's really not that bad. I haven't used COBOL in years ... 1979, 37 years. I try to keep up with IBM enhancements. It's turned into quite a language. It sacrifices clarity for power, Why should the C++ and Java programmers have all the fun. -- Dan Espen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-26 18:50 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <024468d6-fefd-4109-b283-134787072871@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #164048 |
On Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 6:33:00 PM UTC-6, D_J_E wrote: > Why should C worry about some clown coding: > > x[i] = i++; > > The coder may not get what he wants, but he might get what he deserves. That's true enough, but there may be other cases where the mistake... is rather more subtle than an obvious illegitimate dependency on the order of evaluation. John Savard
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-27 11:01 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ovel1d-nu4.ln1@sambook.reistad.name> |
| In reply to | #164049 |
In article <024468d6-fefd-4109-b283-134787072871@googlegroups.com>, Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote: >On Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 6:33:00 PM UTC-6, D_J_E wrote: > >> Why should C worry about some clown coding: >> >> x[i] = i++; >> >> The coder may not get what he wants, but he might get what he deserves. > >That's true enough, but there may be other cases where the mistake... is rather >more subtle than an obvious illegitimate dependency on the order of evaluation. I tested this with both gcc and clang, and both warn about the pitfall. At least that is something. You should have -Wall enabled in all development. Clean code should compile without warnings. It takes out a lot of typing mistakes and such evaluation order pitfalls early in the process. -- mrr
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-27 13:36 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <20160527133600.9ac454c1f4909978a608a0a4@eircom.net> |
| In reply to | #164051 |
On Fri, 27 May 2016 11:01:12 +0200 Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> wrote: > You should have -Wall enabled in all development. Clean code should > compile without warnings. It takes out a lot of typing mistakes and such > evaluation order pitfalls early in the process. Production builds should also have -Werror enabled to make sure the code is clean (at least to the extent the compiler can tell). Every one of those warnings means the compiler is to some extent uncertain as to what you mean. -- Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-27 15:33 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ni9pcp01sfb@news6.newsguy.com> |
| In reply to | #164049 |
On 2016-05-27, Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote: > On Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 6:33:00 PM UTC-6, D_J_E wrote: > >> Why should C worry about some clown coding: >> >> x[i] = i++; >> >> The coder may not get what he wants, but he might get what he deserves. > > That's true enough, but there may be other cases where the mistake... > is rather more subtle than an obvious illegitimate dependency on the > order of evaluation. Yup. Right now I'm going through my entire code base searching for instances of str[n]cpy() with overlapping operands, and replacing them with memmove(). Everything was working fine using the Borland compiler under Windows, but one of my programs showed a glitch when compiled and run under Linux. Gotta love that undefined behaviour. Just when I thought I had dealt with all those nasal demons... -- /~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs) \ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way. X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855. / \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-27 16:07 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <sh_1z.35368$cN4.34239@fx22.iad> |
| In reply to | #164065 |
Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> writes: >On 2016-05-27, Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote: > >> On Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 6:33:00 PM UTC-6, D_J_E wrote: >> >>> Why should C worry about some clown coding: >>> >>> x[i] = i++; >>> >>> The coder may not get what he wants, but he might get what he deserves. >> >> That's true enough, but there may be other cases where the mistake... >> is rather more subtle than an obvious illegitimate dependency on the >> order of evaluation. > >Yup. Right now I'm going through my entire code base searching for >instances of str[n]cpy() with overlapping operands, and replacing them >with memmove(). Everything was working fine using the Borland compiler >under Windows, but one of my programs showed a glitch when compiled and >run under Linux. > >Gotta love that undefined behaviour. Just when I thought I had >dealt with all those nasal demons... > To be fair, overlapping operands to strcpy() and memcpy() has been documented as undefined since the first standards documents (e.g. SVID) in the 80's.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-27 19:20 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nia6lv02j0n@news3.newsguy.com> |
| In reply to | #164068 |
On 2016-05-27, Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote:
> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> writes:
>
>> On 2016-05-27, Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> On Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 6:33:00 PM UTC-6, D_J_E wrote:
>>>
>>>> Why should C worry about some clown coding:
>>>>
>>>> x[i] = i++;
>>>>
>>>> The coder may not get what he wants, but he might get what he deserves.
>>>
>>> That's true enough, but there may be other cases where the mistake...
>>> is rather more subtle than an obvious illegitimate dependency on the
>>> order of evaluation.
>>
>> Yup. Right now I'm going through my entire code base searching for
>> instances of str[n]cpy() with overlapping operands, and replacing them
>> with memmove(). Everything was working fine using the Borland compiler
>> under Windows, but one of my programs showed a glitch when compiled and
>> run under Linux.
>>
>> Gotta love that undefined behaviour. Just when I thought I had
>> dealt with all those nasal demons...
>
> To be fair, overlapping operands to strcpy() and memcpy() has been
> documented as undefined since the first standards documents (e.g. SVID)
> in the 80's.
Oh, I assume full responsibility for the screw-up. I suppose
my mind got a bit warped by the example in the original K&R:
strcpy(s, t)
char **s, *t;
{
while(*s++ = *t++)
;
}
which works fine in cases like
strcpy(string, string+1);
But newer systems spell out quite explicitly in the man pages
that strcpy() doesn't necessarily work that way anymore.
The fact that I missed the warning is my fault alone.
--
/~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
/ \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-27 19:53 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <UA12z.25091$ai3.21069@fx03.iad> |
| In reply to | #164073 |
Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> writes:
>On 2016-05-27, Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote:
>
>>
>> To be fair, overlapping operands to strcpy() and memcpy() has been
>> documented as undefined since the first standards documents (e.g. SVID)
>> in the 80's.
>
>Oh, I assume full responsibility for the screw-up. I suppose
>my mind got a bit warped by the example in the original K&R:
>
>strcpy(s, t)
>char **s, *t;
>{
> while(*s++ = *t++)
> ;
>}
>
>which works fine in cases like
>
> strcpy(string, string+1);
>
>But newer systems spell out quite explicitly in the man pages
>that strcpy() doesn't necessarily work that way anymore.
>The fact that I missed the warning is my fault alone.
The burroughs medium systems, being a memory-to-memory architecture,
had useful characteristics for overlapping move instructions:
http://vseries.lurndal.org/doku.php?id=instructions:mva
* When the A and B address controllers indicate UA data, the field
lengths are equal (AF = BF) and the value of the final B address
is within the A data field [A + 2, A + (2 * AF)], repeat the
source data field between the A and B addresses throughout the
destination data field.
* Cases of overlaping A and B, other than described above, may produce
inconsistent results. See Compatibility Notes A.03.
http://vseries.lurndal.org/doku.php?id=instructions:mvn
* When the A and B address controllers indicate UN data, the field
lengths are equal (AF = BF) and the value of the final B address
is one greater than the final A address, repeat the first digit
of the source data field throughout the destination data field.
* Cases of overlaping A and B, other than described above, may produce
inconsistent results. See Compatibility Notes A.04.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-27 20:55 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <dqrqiuFm19sU11@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #164074 |
On Fri, 27 May 2016 19:53:24 +0000, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> writes:
>>On 2016-05-27, Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote:
>
>>> To be fair, overlapping operands to strcpy() and memcpy() has been
>>> documented as undefined since the first standards documents (e.g.
>>> SVID)
>>> in the 80's.
>>
>>Oh, I assume full responsibility for the screw-up. I suppose my mind
>>got a bit warped by the example in the original K&R:
>>
>>strcpy(s, t)
>>char **s, *t;
>>{
>> while(*s++ = *t++)
>> ;
>>}
>>
>>which works fine in cases like
>>
>> strcpy(string, string+1);
>>
>>But newer systems spell out quite explicitly in the man pages that
>>strcpy() doesn't necessarily work that way anymore.
>>The fact that I missed the warning is my fault alone.
>
> The burroughs medium systems, being a memory-to-memory architecture,
> had useful characteristics for overlapping move instructions:
>
> http://vseries.lurndal.org/doku.php?id=instructions:mva
>
> * When the A and B address controllers indicate UA data, the field
> lengths are equal (AF = BF) and the value of the final B address is
> within the A data field [A + 2, A + (2 * AF)], repeat the source
> data field between the A and B addresses throughout the destination
> data field.
>
> * Cases of overlaping A and B, other than described above, may produce
> inconsistent results. See Compatibility Notes A.03.
>
> http://vseries.lurndal.org/doku.php?id=instructions:mvn
>
>
>
> * When the A and B address controllers indicate UN data, the field
> lengths are equal (AF = BF) and the value of the final B address is
> one greater than the final A address, repeat the first digit of the
> source data field throughout the destination data field.
>
> * Cases of overlaping A and B, other than described above, may produce
> inconsistent results. See Compatibility Notes A.04.
The VAX just got it right with MOVC3/MOVC5:
"The operation of the instruction is such that overlap of the source and
destination strings does not affect the result"
--
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-28 15:18 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <535365362.486144732.868970.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #164075 |
Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> wrote:
> On Fri, 27 May 2016 19:53:24 +0000, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>
>> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> writes:
>>> On 2016-05-27, Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote:
>>
>>>> To be fair, overlapping operands to strcpy() and memcpy() has been
>>>> documented as undefined since the first standards documents (e.g.
>>>> SVID)
>>>> in the 80's.
>>>
>>> Oh, I assume full responsibility for the screw-up. I suppose my mind
>>> got a bit warped by the example in the original K&R:
>>>
>>> strcpy(s, t)
>>> char **s, *t;
>>> {
>>> while(*s++ = *t++)
>>> ;
>>> }
>>>
>>> which works fine in cases like
>>>
>>> strcpy(string, string+1);
>>>
>>> But newer systems spell out quite explicitly in the man pages that
>>> strcpy() doesn't necessarily work that way anymore.
>>> The fact that I missed the warning is my fault alone.
>>
>> The burroughs medium systems, being a memory-to-memory architecture,
>> had useful characteristics for overlapping move instructions:
>>
>> http://vseries.lurndal.org/doku.php?id=instructions:mva
>>
>> * When the A and B address controllers indicate UA data, the field
>> lengths are equal (AF = BF) and the value of the final B address is
>> within the A data field [A + 2, A + (2 * AF)], repeat the source
>> data field between the A and B addresses throughout the destination
>> data field.
>>
>> * Cases of overlaping A and B, other than described above, may produce
>> inconsistent results. See Compatibility Notes A.03.
>>
>> http://vseries.lurndal.org/doku.php?id=instructions:mvn
>>
>>
>>
>> * When the A and B address controllers indicate UN data, the field
>> lengths are equal (AF = BF) and the value of the final B address is
>> one greater than the final A address, repeat the first digit of the
>> source data field throughout the destination data field.
>>
>> * Cases of overlaping A and B, other than described above, may produce
>> inconsistent results. See Compatibility Notes A.04.
>
> The VAX just got it right with MOVC3/MOVC5:
>
> "The operation of the instruction is such that overlap of the source and
> destination strings does not affect the result"
>
It's what the programmer would probably want, but seems like a lot of extra
work for he hardware or microcode.
--
Pete
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-28 20:25 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <dqud5fFm19sU18@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #164087 |
On Sat, 28 May 2016 15:18:22 -0400, Peter Flass wrote:
> Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> wrote:
>> On Fri, 27 May 2016 19:53:24 +0000, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>
>>> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> writes:
>>>> On 2016-05-27, Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> To be fair, overlapping operands to strcpy() and memcpy() has been
>>>>> documented as undefined since the first standards documents (e.g.
>>>>> SVID)
>>>>> in the 80's.
>>>>
>>>> Oh, I assume full responsibility for the screw-up. I suppose my mind
>>>> got a bit warped by the example in the original K&R:
>>>>
>>>> strcpy(s, t)
>>>> char **s, *t;
>>>> {
>>>> while(*s++ = *t++)
>>>> ;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> which works fine in cases like
>>>>
>>>> strcpy(string, string+1);
>>>>
>>>> But newer systems spell out quite explicitly in the man pages that
>>>> strcpy() doesn't necessarily work that way anymore.
>>>> The fact that I missed the warning is my fault alone.
>>>
>>> The burroughs medium systems, being a memory-to-memory architecture,
>>> had useful characteristics for overlapping move instructions:
>>>
>>> http://vseries.lurndal.org/doku.php?id=instructions:mva
>>>
>>> * When the A and B address controllers indicate UA data, the field
>>> lengths are equal (AF = BF) and the value of the final B address is
>>> within the A data field [A + 2, A + (2 * AF)], repeat the source data
>>> field between the A and B addresses throughout the destination data
>>> field.
>>>
>>> * Cases of overlaping A and B, other than described above, may produce
>>> inconsistent results. See Compatibility Notes A.03.
>>>
>>> http://vseries.lurndal.org/doku.php?id=instructions:mvn
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> * When the A and B address controllers indicate UN data, the field
>>> lengths are equal (AF = BF) and the value of the final B address is
>>> one greater than the final A address, repeat the first digit of the
>>> source data field throughout the destination data field.
>>>
>>> * Cases of overlaping A and B, other than described above, may produce
>>> inconsistent results. See Compatibility Notes A.04.
>>
>> The VAX just got it right with MOVC3/MOVC5:
>>
>> "The operation of the instruction is such that overlap of the source
>> and destination strings does not affect the result"
>>
>>
> It's what the programmer would probably want, but seems like a lot of
> extra work for he hardware or microcode.
It was typical of the VAX. Not many architectures have instructions to
manipulate doubly linked lists - with interlocks if required. Nor to
calculate polynomials.
--
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-31 14:39 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <2nh3z.114062$qZ7.30990@fx35.iad> |
| In reply to | #164093 |
Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> writes: > git://git.gnome.org/pan2) >Bytes: 4007 >X-Received-Bytes: 4025 >X-Received-Body-CRC: 120500033 > > >It was typical of the VAX. Not many architectures have instructions to >manipulate doubly linked lists - with interlocks if required. Nor to >calculate polynomials. It's only a single-linked list, but: http://vseries.lurndal.org/doku.php?id=instructions:slt Then there was mutual exclusion and condition variables: http://vseries.lurndal.org/doku.php?id=instructions:lok
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-31 14:37 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <Vkh3z.114061$qZ7.39542@fx35.iad> |
| In reply to | #164075 |
Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> writes: > git://git.gnome.org/pan2) >> The burroughs medium systems, being a memory-to-memory architecture, >> had useful characteristics for overlapping move instructions: >> >> http://vseries.lurndal.org/doku.php?id=instructions:mva >> >> * When the A and B address controllers indicate UA data, the field >> lengths are equal (AF = BF) and the value of the final B address is >> within the A data field [A + 2, A + (2 * AF)], repeat the source >> data field between the A and B addresses throughout the destination >> data field. >> >> * Cases of overlaping A and B, other than described above, may produce >> inconsistent results. See Compatibility Notes A.03. >> >> http://vseries.lurndal.org/doku.php?id=instructions:mvn >> >> >> >> * When the A and B address controllers indicate UN data, the field >> lengths are equal (AF = BF) and the value of the final B address is >> one greater than the final A address, repeat the first digit of the >> source data field throughout the destination data field. >> >> * Cases of overlaping A and B, other than described above, may produce >> inconsistent results. See Compatibility Notes A.04. > >The VAX just got it right with MOVC3/MOVC5: > >"The operation of the instruction is such that overlap of the source and >destination strings does not affect the result" Ah, but: 1) the burroughs cases were generally very useful (called move and smear) 2) The MOVC5 had padding capabilities built-in, much like the burroughs moves.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-04 22:28 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nj068c$a31$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #164049 |
"Quadibloc" <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote in message news:024468d6-fefd-4109-b283-134787072871@googlegroups.com... > On Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 6:33:00 PM UTC-6, D_J_E wrote: > >> Why should C worry about some clown coding: >> >> x[i] = i++; >> >> The coder may not get what he wants, but he might get what he deserves. > > That's true enough, but there may be other cases where the mistake... is > rather > more subtle than an obvious illegitimate dependency on the order of > evaluation. > "x[i] = i++;" causes "undefined behavior". That means demons may come out of your nose. Or the compiler may drop a piano on you. *Anything* might happen!!! The behavior is undefined. -- numerist at aquaporin4 dot com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-27 10:51 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tdel1d-nu4.ln1@sambook.reistad.name> |
| In reply to | #164048 |
In article <ni84d0$l26$1@dont-email.me>, Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote: >Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes: > >> Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote: >>> Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> writes: >>> >>>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes: >>>> >>>>> Quadibloc wrote: >>>> >>>>>> On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 5:40:26 PM UTC-6, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: >>>> >>>>>>> The story of how a single language answers the question, "Can a >>>>>>> young girl with no previous programming experience find happiness >>>> >>>>>> Well, there you are. This explains why PL/I never caught on, while >>>>>> FORTRAN and COBOL continue to this day. >>>> >>>>>> What self-respecting programmer would use a language that's designed >>>>>> for... girls! >>>> >>>>> Patui! What self-respecting girls would choose PL/I? >>>> >>>> Nan Detlaff and Marj Benson, to name two of my acquaintance (though >>>> Nan usually used BAL, since she was an OS/360 systems programmer). >>>> >>>> Nan was manager of the systems programmers at the Computer-Assisted >>>> Education Laboratory of the College of Education at the University of >>>> Texas when I was a lowly work-study lab monitor (who happened to know >>>> programming, which fascinated her). >>>> >>>> Marj was the manager of Financial Systems at the University of Chicago >>>> Computation Center who hired me as a junior programmer/analyst after I >>>> finished class work for my Ph. D. in another field entirely. It was >>>> her mandate that all non-vendor code (mostly COBOL) be written in >>>> PL/I. >>>> >>>> And I'd say both of them respected themselves with good reason. >>>> >>>> Make that three: My high school girlfriend, Lin Nielsen (now Cochran), >>>> made a good living with her library science degree and DBA skills. >>>> She's the one who gave me a book on programming the System/360 as a >>>> graduation present. >>>> >>>> PL/I rules! Just because it was ported to the VAX under VMS doesn't >>>> mean it's a bad language. >>> >>> Over the years, I had little respect for PL/I. Then the time came when >>> I had to use PL/I for a serious enhancement to existing PL/I code. The >>> language did not let me down. I found it quite easy to write the simple >>> parts with simple code and when I had to get into more sophisticated >>> stuff, I found the language has some nice advanced features. >>> >>> Of course it makes no difference whether the coder is wearing a dress or >>> a pair of slacks. I think referring to the coders sex was an attempt to >>> be cute. Which I found annoying. >>> >>> Pete, of course is the PL/I expert on this forum. I'd listen to his >>> opinion rather than the ignorant comment from the know-nothing poster >>> you replied to. >>> >> >> I haven't commented, because I may be a bit biased. Naturally I think PL/I >> is the greatest thing since sliced bread. To the point, I have known a >> number of good PL/I programmers of both sexes. It's possible to do almost >> anything in PL/I, simply and clearly. The only thing I have found missing >> relative to C is side-effects in expressions, which I think are abhorrent >> anyhow. > >As I went through my conversion to a "PL/I is good" programmer, >I'd discuss the language with other, more experienced PL/I developers. >They always had one or more stories about bad PL/I features, >Sorry, usually it was some deep dark, well buried trap that you >could fall into. Can't remember any details. >The point is, as you get to know more and more, some of that stuff >is going to trip you up. No, the one thing I am not enthused about with PL/1 is the typeconversion with wild abandon. If you add a float and a string, well it will do the best it can. (take the numeric value of the string). This is probably how it has to be with the pl/1 grammar etc. but it could warn when it does this. Really. >I agree, PL/I can do without side effects. >C is meant to be more machine oriented. > >Why should C worry about some clown coding: > >x[i] = i++; > >The coder may not get what he wants, but he might get what he deserves. These can be done well without. The statement separator ";" also works very differently from c/pascal etc, but the differences are subtle at times. Otherwise I like the language a lot. I am waiting for the gnu pl/1 with excitement. (But it takes it's time). >> Some programmers used to like COBOL because of its simplicity: there's >> usually only one way to do a thing, assuming it's possible at all. PL/I >> usually provides several ways to do a given thing. > >I've done more COBOL than anything. >I've never seen a business problem that couldn't be >solved with a reasonable amount of COBOL. >Copy paste is your friend, it's really not that bad. But it was a relief to be able to use PL/1 in the one stint I had with mainframes. (Cics 1.7, if that dates it). >I haven't used COBOL in years ... 1979, 37 years. >I try to keep up with IBM enhancements. >It's turned into quite a language. >It sacrifices clarity for power, >Why should the C++ and Java programmers have all the fun. No; but I'll take PL/1 any day over cobol. And Java. -- mrr
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-27 06:56 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <1051644006.486038862.651093.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #164050 |
Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> wrote: > In article <ni84d0$l26$1@dont-email.me>, Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote: >> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes: >> >>> Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote: >>>> Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> writes: >>>> >>>>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes: >>>>> >>>>>> Quadibloc wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>> On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 5:40:26 PM UTC-6, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>>> The story of how a single language answers the question, "Can a >>>>>>>> young girl with no previous programming experience find happiness >>>>> >>>>>>> Well, there you are. This explains why PL/I never caught on, while >>>>>>> FORTRAN and COBOL continue to this day. >>>>> >>>>>>> What self-respecting programmer would use a language that's designed >>>>>>> for... girls! >>>>> >>>>>> Patui! What self-respecting girls would choose PL/I? >>>>> >>>>> Nan Detlaff and Marj Benson, to name two of my acquaintance (though >>>>> Nan usually used BAL, since she was an OS/360 systems programmer). >>>>> >>>>> Nan was manager of the systems programmers at the Computer-Assisted >>>>> Education Laboratory of the College of Education at the University of >>>>> Texas when I was a lowly work-study lab monitor (who happened to know >>>>> programming, which fascinated her). >>>>> >>>>> Marj was the manager of Financial Systems at the University of Chicago >>>>> Computation Center who hired me as a junior programmer/analyst after I >>>>> finished class work for my Ph. D. in another field entirely. It was >>>>> her mandate that all non-vendor code (mostly COBOL) be written in >>>>> PL/I. >>>>> >>>>> And I'd say both of them respected themselves with good reason. >>>>> >>>>> Make that three: My high school girlfriend, Lin Nielsen (now Cochran), >>>>> made a good living with her library science degree and DBA skills. >>>>> She's the one who gave me a book on programming the System/360 as a >>>>> graduation present. >>>>> >>>>> PL/I rules! Just because it was ported to the VAX under VMS doesn't >>>>> mean it's a bad language. >>>> >>>> Over the years, I had little respect for PL/I. Then the time came when >>>> I had to use PL/I for a serious enhancement to existing PL/I code. The >>>> language did not let me down. I found it quite easy to write the simple >>>> parts with simple code and when I had to get into more sophisticated >>>> stuff, I found the language has some nice advanced features. >>>> >>>> Of course it makes no difference whether the coder is wearing a dress or >>>> a pair of slacks. I think referring to the coders sex was an attempt to >>>> be cute. Which I found annoying. >>>> >>>> Pete, of course is the PL/I expert on this forum. I'd listen to his >>>> opinion rather than the ignorant comment from the know-nothing poster >>>> you replied to. >>>> >>> >>> I haven't commented, because I may be a bit biased. Naturally I think PL/I >>> is the greatest thing since sliced bread. To the point, I have known a >>> number of good PL/I programmers of both sexes. It's possible to do almost >>> anything in PL/I, simply and clearly. The only thing I have found missing >>> relative to C is side-effects in expressions, which I think are abhorrent >>> anyhow. >> >> As I went through my conversion to a "PL/I is good" programmer, >> I'd discuss the language with other, more experienced PL/I developers. >> They always had one or more stories about bad PL/I features, >> Sorry, usually it was some deep dark, well buried trap that you >> could fall into. Can't remember any details. >> The point is, as you get to know more and more, some of that stuff >> is going to trip you up. > > No, the one thing I am not enthused about with PL/1 is the typeconversion > with wild abandon. If you add a float and a string, well it will do the > best it can. (take the numeric value of the string). This is probably how > it has to be with the pl/1 grammar etc. but it could warn when it does > this. Really. Even more confusingly it always converts the string to FIXED DECIMAL(7) [IIRC]. You're right, it could issue a warning, but that's just a compiler issue, not a language issue. -- Pete
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btopenworld.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-27 15:51 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <prydnfdYSKF9w9XKnZ2dnUU78KGdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #164053 |
On 27/05/2016 11:56, Peter Flass wrote: > Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> wrote: >> In article <ni84d0$l26$1@dont-email.me>, Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote: >>> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes: >>> >>>> Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote: >>>>> Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> writes: >>>>> >>>>>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Quadibloc wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 5:40:26 PM UTC-6, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The story of how a single language answers the question, "Can a >>>>>>>>> young girl with no previous programming experience find happiness >>>>>> >>>>>>>> Well, there you are. This explains why PL/I never caught on, while >>>>>>>> FORTRAN and COBOL continue to this day. >>>>>> >>>>>>>> What self-respecting programmer would use a language that's designed >>>>>>>> for... girls! >>>>>> >>>>>>> Patui! What self-respecting girls would choose PL/I? >>>>>> >>>>>> Nan Detlaff and Marj Benson, to name two of my acquaintance (though >>>>>> Nan usually used BAL, since she was an OS/360 systems programmer). >>>>>> >>>>>> Nan was manager of the systems programmers at the Computer-Assisted >>>>>> Education Laboratory of the College of Education at the University of >>>>>> Texas when I was a lowly work-study lab monitor (who happened to know >>>>>> programming, which fascinated her). >>>>>> >>>>>> Marj was the manager of Financial Systems at the University of Chicago >>>>>> Computation Center who hired me as a junior programmer/analyst after I >>>>>> finished class work for my Ph. D. in another field entirely. It was >>>>>> her mandate that all non-vendor code (mostly COBOL) be written in >>>>>> PL/I. >>>>>> >>>>>> And I'd say both of them respected themselves with good reason. >>>>>> >>>>>> Make that three: My high school girlfriend, Lin Nielsen (now Cochran), >>>>>> made a good living with her library science degree and DBA skills. >>>>>> She's the one who gave me a book on programming the System/360 as a >>>>>> graduation present. >>>>>> >>>>>> PL/I rules! Just because it was ported to the VAX under VMS doesn't >>>>>> mean it's a bad language. >>>>> >>>>> Over the years, I had little respect for PL/I. Then the time came when >>>>> I had to use PL/I for a serious enhancement to existing PL/I code. The >>>>> language did not let me down. I found it quite easy to write the simple >>>>> parts with simple code and when I had to get into more sophisticated >>>>> stuff, I found the language has some nice advanced features. >>>>> >>>>> Of course it makes no difference whether the coder is wearing a dress or >>>>> a pair of slacks. I think referring to the coders sex was an attempt to >>>>> be cute. Which I found annoying. >>>>> >>>>> Pete, of course is the PL/I expert on this forum. I'd listen to his >>>>> opinion rather than the ignorant comment from the know-nothing poster >>>>> you replied to. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I haven't commented, because I may be a bit biased. Naturally I think PL/I >>>> is the greatest thing since sliced bread. To the point, I have known a >>>> number of good PL/I programmers of both sexes. It's possible to do almost >>>> anything in PL/I, simply and clearly. The only thing I have found missing >>>> relative to C is side-effects in expressions, which I think are abhorrent >>>> anyhow. >>> >>> As I went through my conversion to a "PL/I is good" programmer, >>> I'd discuss the language with other, more experienced PL/I developers. >>> They always had one or more stories about bad PL/I features, >>> Sorry, usually it was some deep dark, well buried trap that you >>> could fall into. Can't remember any details. >>> The point is, as you get to know more and more, some of that stuff >>> is going to trip you up. >> >> No, the one thing I am not enthused about with PL/1 is the typeconversion >> with wild abandon. If you add a float and a string, well it will do the >> best it can. (take the numeric value of the string). This is probably how >> it has to be with the pl/1 grammar etc. but it could warn when it does >> this. Really. > > Even more confusingly it always converts the string to FIXED DECIMAL(7) > [IIRC]. You're right, it could issue a warning, but that's just a compiler > issue, not a language issue. > Partly but the language could have made conversions explicit.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-27 20:25 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <a1gm1d-cd6.ln1@sambook.reistad.name> |
| In reply to | #164053 |
In article <1051644006.486038862.651093.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: >Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> wrote: >> In article <ni84d0$l26$1@dont-email.me>, Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote: >>> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes: >>> >>>> Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote: >>>>> Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> writes: >>>>> >>>>>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Quadibloc wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 5:40:26 PM UTC-6, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The story of how a single language answers the question, "Can a >>>>>>>>> young girl with no previous programming experience find happiness >>>>>> >>>>>>>> Well, there you are. This explains why PL/I never caught on, while >>>>>>>> FORTRAN and COBOL continue to this day. >>>>>> >>>>>>>> What self-respecting programmer would use a language that's designed >>>>>>>> for... girls! >>>>>> >>>>>>> Patui! What self-respecting girls would choose PL/I? >>>>>> >>>>>> Nan Detlaff and Marj Benson, to name two of my acquaintance (though >>>>>> Nan usually used BAL, since she was an OS/360 systems programmer). >>>>>> >>>>>> Nan was manager of the systems programmers at the Computer-Assisted >>>>>> Education Laboratory of the College of Education at the University of >>>>>> Texas when I was a lowly work-study lab monitor (who happened to know >>>>>> programming, which fascinated her). >>>>>> >>>>>> Marj was the manager of Financial Systems at the University of Chicago >>>>>> Computation Center who hired me as a junior programmer/analyst after I >>>>>> finished class work for my Ph. D. in another field entirely. It was >>>>>> her mandate that all non-vendor code (mostly COBOL) be written in >>>>>> PL/I. >>>>>> >>>>>> And I'd say both of them respected themselves with good reason. >>>>>> >>>>>> Make that three: My high school girlfriend, Lin Nielsen (now Cochran), >>>>>> made a good living with her library science degree and DBA skills. >>>>>> She's the one who gave me a book on programming the System/360 as a >>>>>> graduation present. >>>>>> >>>>>> PL/I rules! Just because it was ported to the VAX under VMS doesn't >>>>>> mean it's a bad language. >>>>> >>>>> Over the years, I had little respect for PL/I. Then the time came when >>>>> I had to use PL/I for a serious enhancement to existing PL/I code. The >>>>> language did not let me down. I found it quite easy to write the simple >>>>> parts with simple code and when I had to get into more sophisticated >>>>> stuff, I found the language has some nice advanced features. >>>>> >>>>> Of course it makes no difference whether the coder is wearing a dress or >>>>> a pair of slacks. I think referring to the coders sex was an attempt to >>>>> be cute. Which I found annoying. >>>>> >>>>> Pete, of course is the PL/I expert on this forum. I'd listen to his >>>>> opinion rather than the ignorant comment from the know-nothing poster >>>>> you replied to. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I haven't commented, because I may be a bit biased. Naturally I think PL/I >>>> is the greatest thing since sliced bread. To the point, I have known a >>>> number of good PL/I programmers of both sexes. It's possible to do almost >>>> anything in PL/I, simply and clearly. The only thing I have found missing >>>> relative to C is side-effects in expressions, which I think are abhorrent >>>> anyhow. >>> >>> As I went through my conversion to a "PL/I is good" programmer, >>> I'd discuss the language with other, more experienced PL/I developers. >>> They always had one or more stories about bad PL/I features, >>> Sorry, usually it was some deep dark, well buried trap that you >>> could fall into. Can't remember any details. >>> The point is, as you get to know more and more, some of that stuff >>> is going to trip you up. >> >> No, the one thing I am not enthused about with PL/1 is the typeconversion >> with wild abandon. If you add a float and a string, well it will do the >> best it can. (take the numeric value of the string). This is probably how >> it has to be with the pl/1 grammar etc. but it could warn when it does >> this. Really. > >Even more confusingly it always converts the string to FIXED DECIMAL(7) >[IIRC]. You're right, it could issue a warning, but that's just a compiler >issue, not a language issue. Yes, it is a language issue. But one that can be addressed by compiler implementations. As I understand it the whole PL/1 grammar is based on doing some (or, a lot of) type conversion while evaluating expressions. -- mrr
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-05-28 15:18 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <1874727092.486144443.996567.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #164081 |
Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> wrote: > In article <1051644006.486038862.651093.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>, > Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: >> Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> wrote: >>> In article <ni84d0$l26$1@dont-email.me>, Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote: >>>> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes: >>>> >>>>> Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> wrote: >>>>>> Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> writes: >>>>>> >>>>>>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Quadibloc wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 5:40:26 PM UTC-6, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The story of how a single language answers the question, "Can a >>>>>>>>>> young girl with no previous programming experience find happiness >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Well, there you are. This explains why PL/I never caught on, while >>>>>>>>> FORTRAN and COBOL continue to this day. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> What self-respecting programmer would use a language that's designed >>>>>>>>> for... girls! >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Patui! What self-respecting girls would choose PL/I? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Nan Detlaff and Marj Benson, to name two of my acquaintance (though >>>>>>> Nan usually used BAL, since she was an OS/360 systems programmer). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Nan was manager of the systems programmers at the Computer-Assisted >>>>>>> Education Laboratory of the College of Education at the University of >>>>>>> Texas when I was a lowly work-study lab monitor (who happened to know >>>>>>> programming, which fascinated her). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Marj was the manager of Financial Systems at the University of Chicago >>>>>>> Computation Center who hired me as a junior programmer/analyst after I >>>>>>> finished class work for my Ph. D. in another field entirely. It was >>>>>>> her mandate that all non-vendor code (mostly COBOL) be written in >>>>>>> PL/I. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> And I'd say both of them respected themselves with good reason. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Make that three: My high school girlfriend, Lin Nielsen (now Cochran), >>>>>>> made a good living with her library science degree and DBA skills. >>>>>>> She's the one who gave me a book on programming the System/360 as a >>>>>>> graduation present. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> PL/I rules! Just because it was ported to the VAX under VMS doesn't >>>>>>> mean it's a bad language. >>>>>> >>>>>> Over the years, I had little respect for PL/I. Then the time came when >>>>>> I had to use PL/I for a serious enhancement to existing PL/I code. The >>>>>> language did not let me down. I found it quite easy to write the simple >>>>>> parts with simple code and when I had to get into more sophisticated >>>>>> stuff, I found the language has some nice advanced features. >>>>>> >>>>>> Of course it makes no difference whether the coder is wearing a dress or >>>>>> a pair of slacks. I think referring to the coders sex was an attempt to >>>>>> be cute. Which I found annoying. >>>>>> >>>>>> Pete, of course is the PL/I expert on this forum. I'd listen to his >>>>>> opinion rather than the ignorant comment from the know-nothing poster >>>>>> you replied to. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I haven't commented, because I may be a bit biased. Naturally I think PL/I >>>>> is the greatest thing since sliced bread. To the point, I have known a >>>>> number of good PL/I programmers of both sexes. It's possible to do almost >>>>> anything in PL/I, simply and clearly. The only thing I have found missing >>>>> relative to C is side-effects in expressions, which I think are abhorrent >>>>> anyhow. >>>> >>>> As I went through my conversion to a "PL/I is good" programmer, >>>> I'd discuss the language with other, more experienced PL/I developers. >>>> They always had one or more stories about bad PL/I features, >>>> Sorry, usually it was some deep dark, well buried trap that you >>>> could fall into. Can't remember any details. >>>> The point is, as you get to know more and more, some of that stuff >>>> is going to trip you up. >>> >>> No, the one thing I am not enthused about with PL/1 is the typeconversion >>> with wild abandon. If you add a float and a string, well it will do the >>> best it can. (take the numeric value of the string). This is probably how >>> it has to be with the pl/1 grammar etc. but it could warn when it does >>> this. Really. >> >> Even more confusingly it always converts the string to FIXED DECIMAL(7) >> [IIRC]. You're right, it could issue a warning, but that's just a compiler >> issue, not a language issue. > > Yes, it is a language issue. But one that can be addressed by compiler > implementations. As I understand it the whole PL/1 grammar is based on > doing some (or, a lot of) type conversion while evaluating expressions. > It doesn't have to, but it's something for the programmer to be aware of. In the normal case there shouldn't be conversions, except the aforementioned case of decimal constant to binary, but this should be done at compile time, and isn't an issue anyway unless it has fractional digits. -- Pete
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 29 of 30 — ← Prev page 1 … 27 28 [29] 30 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.folklore.computers
csiph-web