Hi Murray,

05 Jan 99, Murray Lesser of 1:109/347 wrote to Eddy Thilleman:

ML> Before C came along, PL/I was favored by the "computer
ML> science" types.

From the little what I've read about PL/I, it's an interesting language.

ML> Nowadays, it is still favored by we non-computer-science types
ML> who prefer a rational programming language suitable for both
ML> "scientific" and "data processing" applications 

How does PL/I compare to Pascal?

ML> (IMO, C is suitable for neither!), 

IMHO, C is only a language idioty!

ML> but IBM has priced PL/I out of the amateur market. David Noon
ML> still thinks that "PL/I Personal" will return some day. 

I hope so. I want to get the personal version.

ML> I'm not so sure, but I am willing to wait. In the meantime, I
ML> am using a back-version (VA PL/I "Standard" v 2.0 for OS/2)

back-version? what's that?

ML> that seems to still work OK.

Is this the current version? What has Visual Age to do with PL/I?

Cheers   -=Eddy=-   (eddy.thilleman{at}net.hcc.nl)

... "Add this list of n numbers and divide the sum by n", said Tom meanly.
--- MBM v4.14