RE: PL/I on V4R1?

RE:     RE: PL/I on V4R1?

On Tue, 30 Dec 1997, Bob Crothers wrote:

>> Why do we need C on the AS/400?  Because there is a LOT of 
>> software in the world that is written in C.  Good, Bad or 
>> indifferent, C is much more common than PL1 or even RPG.
>> 


>No argument here.

>My point is simple this:  Think of how much MORE would be available if the 
>industry hadn't allowed itself to fragment the languages!  Think how much
>MORE would be available if we were using FEWER languages and just added
>standardized functionality....
>
>There's basically nothing in C that wasn't in the full blown versions
>(non-midrange versions) of PL/I or that could have been easily added
>later to the language definition.....
>
>Don in DC metro

Don 
Who cares if it was better or that it basically handled everything that 
COBOL, RPG, Fortran, C, and Assembler could do.  Or even if 80% percent
of people who were versed in multiple languages thought it was the best.

The real question is did the Magazines like it?  I mean was it portrayed
by the article writers as being a language that Big Blue was "pushing
down the industries throats as THE language" ?  he said satirically <G>

Just a thought.


+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to "MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com".
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---