In a message dated 01-15-99, Ivan Todoroski said to David Noon about "APL2
for OS/2"

Hi Ivan,

 DN> In my case, getting paid.

IT>  :) Well I guess that's a reason enough...

I wish it were even more. ... ;-)

IT>  But apart from that, do you actually LIKE PL/I, do you think it's a
IT>  good language? What language do you prefer and use most in your day
IT>  to day programming?

My weapon of choice is an assembler. However, the economics of application
development rail against assembler, so compiler languages rule.

Among compiler languages in frequent use, I like PL/I best -- by a
considerable margin. Assuming we exclude ALGOL 68 under the "frequent use"
limitation, my second favourite would be either C/C++ or Object Pascal.

IT> I thank you very much for all the above explanations!

You're welcome.

IT> I like the automatic storage management in APL, and also PL/I's "rich
IT> grammar with which you can do almost anything" sounds like my kind of
IT> language!

Remember that a language that can do anything often will do anything. It is
best to run your first few programs with some caution. Keep them simple
until you have a feel for PL/I's semantics model. [One actually gets used to
the "common sense" model for PL/I semantics quite quickly.]

 DN> There is a language reference manual in .INF format.

IT>  So, would you care to attach it to grnch{at}eon.pmf.ukim.edu.mk, or is it
IT>  illegal or something?

Watch your e-mail.

IT>  And what about APL? Is it abandoned?

You have to buy APL2 for OS/2 from IBM or a reseller. It is not cheap. Like
PL/I, it is viewed by IBM as a "corporate" development tool, not a personal
one. Unsurprisingly, PL/I and APL2 are developed at the same laboratory,
Santa Teresa, and they might even be under the same product manager.

Regards

Dave

___
 * MR/2 2.25 #353 * If Clinton wins send Candy.  He's already had Flowers!

--- Maximus/2 3.01