Re: programming in PL/I

"Derek M. Jones" <>
Sat, 14 Jan 2012 14:08:29 +0000

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
Re: Parser generator (2012-01-08)
Re: Parser generator (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2012-01-08)
Re: Parser generator (2012-01-11)
Re: programming in PL/I (2012-01-12)
Re: programming in PL/I (Robert AH Prins) (2012-01-14)
Re: programming in PL/I (Derek M. Jones) (2012-01-14)
Re: programming in PL/I (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2012-01-15)
Re: programming in PL/I (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2012-01-15)
| List of all articles for this month |

From: "Derek M. Jones" <>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2012 14:08:29 +0000
References: 12-01-009 12-01-010 12-01-013 12-01-017
Keywords: PL/I, comment
Posted-Date: 14 Jan 2012 15:14:51 EST


It is interesting to hear someone stand up for PL/1 these days.

>> Is there a reason to prefer PL/I over C++ or Java?
> People coming from IBM envionments 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,

Since both are Turing complete languages how is PL/1 more powerful?

> is older, has good optimizing compilers
> available,

But are they available for cpus that most people use today?

> and I personally prefer it.

Probably the major reason why people promote the benefits of any language.
[This is getting a bit far from compiler design. PL/I suffers and
benefits from being a kitchen sink language. Cobol-style pictures
are really handy if you're doing formatted numeric I/O, just
strange otherwise. -John]

Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.