|
saustad wrote: >For my 2 cents worth, the best computer language ever designed is PL/I. As >for why it never caught on... I agree - PL/I was always rather underrated. It's also the source for some of my favorite stories. (Oh no! Run away! He's starting on his stories again!) In my 3rd year programming languages course, the prof discussed the important programming languages at the time. He covered each one under a number of specific topics. When we got to PL/I, he wrote on the blackboard "Significant Enhancements", left the rest of the board blank, and went on the to next topic! The thing to remember about PL/I was that it was developed just before programming language theory had settled down. It was before the benefits of strong typing and structured programming were fully understood and accepted by most in the field. Furthermore, the language was supposed to combine all the best features of the common languages COBOL and FORTRAN. And so the language ended up with some interesting features. The language included pretty much every feature known to programming languages at the time (including the kitchen sink). Plus, the language was designed with the naive and optimistic expectation that the programmer knew what he was doing, and it was up to the compiler to make sense of the code, however malformed. (In a way, PL/I was not only an ambitious programming language project, it was also an ambitious AI project!) Around the same time, another group was developing the language (eventually called) Algol 68. For a while, it appeared that the committee would adopt a language designed by Niklaus Wirth. But late in the cycle, another ill-defined proposal was introduced, which gained wide acceptance. To make a long story slightly less long, the committee adopted the new proposal, which had lots of problems, and took a long time to develop, and ended up with a totally incomprehensible description. Implementations of Algol 68 eventually appeared, but no one ever really took the language seriously. Wirth (and a few others) stormed out of one meeting, and he continued to work on his own languages. Algol W morphed into Pascal, which then took the world by storm. The point of that digression was to illustrate what was happening in the world of programming language design at the time. Wirth argued in favor of strong typing, structured programming, and small languages. The Pascal language strongly demonstrated his point, and became the favorite language in academia. And PL/I (remember PL/I?) was the total antitheses. Okay, that was academe. What about the business programming world? Well, PL/I was intended to replace other programming languages like COBOL and FORTRAN. But COBOL and FORTRAN programmers had no desire to learn a new language, and so instead of unifying the commercial programming world, it simply further divided the programming community. In my opinion, PL/I got an unfair rap. Even before languages like Pascal, there was little you could do in Pascal that you couldn't also do in PL/I. It just required a bit of discipline. Furthermore, PL/I subset languages (such as SP/k and PL/C) were indeed being used to teach programming to university students. But that's all ancient history now. Now we have "object oriented" languages and "scripting" languages to add into the mix. Now, the "cool" languages are Java, C++, Perl, and (my favorite) Python. Each has its own benefits and quirks, and over time may also fall by the wayside. Cheers! Hans Hans Boldt, ILE RPG Development, IBM Toronto Lab, boldt@ca.ibm.com
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.