Re: programming in PL/I

Path	csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder3.hal-mli.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border4.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news.iecc.com!nerds-end
From	Robert AH Prins <robert@prino.org>
Newsgroups	comp.compilers
Subject	Re: programming in PL/I
Date	Sat, 14 Jan 2012 09:20:34 +0000
Organization	Compilers Central
Lines	31
Sender	news@iecc.com
Approved	comp.compilers@iecc.com
Message-ID	<12-01-019@comp.compilers> (permalink)
References	<12-01-009@comp.compilers> <12-01-010@comp.compilers> <12-01-013@comp.compilers> <12-01-017@comp.compilers>
NNTP-Posting-Host	news.iecc.com
X-Trace	leila.iecc.com 1326571922 86656 64.57.183.58 (14 Jan 2012 20:12:02 GMT)
X-Complaints-To	abuse@iecc.com
NNTP-Posting-Date	Sat, 14 Jan 2012 20:12:02 +0000 (UTC)
Keywords	PL/I
Posted-Date	14 Jan 2012 15:12:02 EST
X-submission-address	compilers@iecc.com
X-moderator-address	compilers-request@iecc.com
X-FAQ-and-archives	http://compilers.iecc.com
Xref	x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.compilers:418

Show key headers only | View raw

On 2012-01-12 16:30, compilers@is-not-my.name wrote:
> On Thu Jan 12 07:18:12 2012 arnold@skeeve.com wrote:
>
>> Is there a reason to prefer PL/I over C++ or Java?
>
> Yes, several. It would be more relevant to ask if PL/I is preferable
> to C since PL/I is not an object oriented language, is suitable for
> systems programming (usually has but does not necessarily require a
> runtime), does not have garbage collection, implementations don't use
> a VM, etc.
>
> People coming from IBM environments usually don't have any C
> experience but often do have a reasonable working knowledge of PL/I
> or at least exposure to it. PL/I is more powerful than C, is older,
> has good optimizing compilers available,

The IBM PL/I for Windows compiler generates code that is in many cases
no better than the code generated by the likes of Turbo Pascal V3, and
even the code generated by IBM's Enterprise PL/I compiler for z/OS
leaves a lot to be desired. (Disclaimer, I don't have access to anything
after Enterprise PL/I V3R7, current is V4R2, so things may have improved)

> and I personally prefer it. About the only advantage of C over PL/I
> is C usually has some provision for dropping into assembler. PL/I
> doesn't offer this feature. As usual, it comes down to what tools
> are available on your target platforms and what you prefer.

Robert
--
Robert AH Prins
robert(a)prino(d)org

Thread

Re: Parser generator drb@msu.edu (Dennis Boone) - 2012-01-08 11:47 -0600
  Re: Parser generator glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2012-01-08 21:58 +0000
    Re: Parser generator arnold@skeeve.com (Aharon Robbins) - 2012-01-11 20:06 +0000
      Re: PL/I, was Parser generator drb@ihatespam.msu.edu (Dennis Boone) - 2012-01-11 16:19 -0600
      Re: PL/I, was Parser generator Robert AH Prins <robert@prino.org> - 2012-01-11 23:42 +0000
      Re: programming in PL/I compilers@is-not-my.name - 2012-01-12 16:30 +0000
        Re: programming in PL/I Robert AH Prins <robert@prino.org> - 2012-01-14 09:20 +0000
        Re: programming in PL/I "Derek M. Jones" <derek@_NOSPAM_knosof.co.uk> - 2012-01-14 14:08 +0000
          Re: programming in PL/I glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2012-01-15 01:01 +0000
            Re: programming in PL/I glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2012-01-15 11:36 +0000
    Re: Parser generator for PL/I "robin" <robin51@dodo.com.au> - 2012-01-15 02:00 +1100
      Re: Parser generator for PL/I drb@ihatespam.msu.edu (Dennis Boone) - 2012-01-14 23:40 -0600
  Re: Parser generator SLK Systems <slkpg3@gmail.com> - 2012-01-08 20:26 -0500
    Re: Parser generator glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2012-01-11 07:22 +0000
      Re: Parser generator SLK Systems <slkpg3@gmail.com> - 2012-01-11 20:28 -0500

csiph-web