Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!kddlab!ccut!titcca!sragwa!wsgw!socslgw!diamond
From: diamond@csl.sony.co.jp (Norman Diamond)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: PL/I and Reserved Words
Keywords: PL/I keywords
Message-ID: <10994@riks.csl.sony.co.jp>
Date: 24 Oct 89 12:07:02 GMT
References: <2958@usceast.UUCP> <4560@bd.sei.cmu.edu> <465396f5.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM> <6614@ficc.uu.net> <4666d281.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM>
Reply-To: diamond@riks. (Norman Diamond)
Organization: Sony Computer Science Laboratory Inc., Tokyo, Japan
Lines: 19

In article <4666d281.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM> perry@apollo.HP.COM (Jim Perry) writes:

[about someone's opinion of PL/I]

>I'll take exception with "doesn't run on any interesting machines"; I'll
>grant you that there's no UNIX implementation that I'm aware of, and that
>may have killed it.

Sure, the lack of a Unix implementation helped kill it (and maybe we'll
see the death of ANSI magnetic tape formats too).  However, surely PL/I
killed itself.  Would you really specify precisions on your integers?
If so, maintenance will kill you.  This is one of the things Wirth got
perfectly right.

-- 
Norman Diamond, Sony Corp. (diamond%ws.sony.junet@uunet.uu.net seems to work)
  Should the preceding opinions be caught or     |  James Bond asked his
  killed, the sender will disavow all knowledge  |  ATT rep for a source
  of their activities or whereabouts.            |  licence to "kill".