Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!houxm!whuxl!whuxlm!akgua!gatech!seismo!umcp-cs!nbs-amrf!libes
From: libes@nbs-amrf.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.lang.apl
Subject: APL standards
Message-ID: <195@nbs-amrf.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 15-Mar-86 21:18:40 EST
Article-I.D.: nbs-amrf.195
Posted: Sat Mar 15 21:18:40 1986
Date-Received: Mon, 17-Mar-86 04:47:42 EST
Distribution: net
Organization: National Bureau of Standards
Lines: 31

Did the draft ISO/ANSI APL (c. '82) standard every get approved?
I don't recall hearing anything positive about this.  Any comments
one way or the other?  (If the standard did not get approved, why
not?  If it did, is it a useful (rather than theoretical) standard,
in that there are implementations that follow it?)

I am assuming the draft was never approved.  If this is the case,
is it a defacto standard nonetheless?

Whether or not the draft was approved, I classify other APL
implementations roughly as "upwards compatible" with one of:
APL\360, APLSV or APL2.

Is this a reasonable classification (in a gross sense)?  I mean,
are there any other designs that more than, say, 2 other
implementations have followed?

As long as I'm at it, is there a better forum for APL issues than
net.lang.apl?  I rarely see any articles in this newsgroup.  I have
never seen any APL code in the sources newsgroups.  All this makes
me think APL development is dead.  (Are there discussions in Europe
that are not carried to the US?  On other networks?)

Yes, I know about Quote Quad, and I think that's depressing also.

It seems the only time I hear interesting things about APL are at
conferences, but then I don't get to those too often.

Don Libes        {seismo,umcp-cs}!nbs-amrf!libes