Re: Basic structure COBOL

Pete Dashwood wrote:
"CG" <Carl.Gehr.ButNoSPAMStuff@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:e0844$465da0fc$d06620ed$19718@xxxxxxxxxxx
Pete Dashwood wrote:
"CG" <Carl.Gehr.ButNoSPAMStuff@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:d0070$465cc8b1$d06620ed$2489@xxxxxxxxxxx
Pete Dashwood wrote:
"Robin Lee" <robinlee@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:XaCdnd91JbmVO8HbnZ2dnUVZ_judnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
HeyBub wrote:
Get
Mull
Put
Actually I think that's PL1.


LOL! Nice one, Robin... :-)

It almost is...
Of course, it is PL/I [not PL1], but in a thread like this, I guess close counts... [No comment on the rest.]
Carl
Why would you correct him on the name of the language, Carl?

It was originally PL/I as you state. IBM believed everyone would move to it so, "Program Language/ International"

When this dream failed to eventuate, they renamed it as their first attempt, and later manuals showed "PL/1".

(I have seen IBM manuals with each of these names on the cover, depending on when they were published.)

We have never seen, and are now unlikely to, PL/2.
Why? Well, I guess, since the rest of the thread was certainly not going to provide a serious response to the original question, the quality of the thread was not going to be harmed by the comment. And, if someone is going to criticize something, they should at least improve their credibility by demonstrating that they know the correct name of the product. I react the same way when I see 'Cobol' instead of 'COBOL' in print.

I doubt you have ever seen an 'official' IBM publication that used PL/1 or PL1 or PLI.

Well there was one with a green cover and one with a red cover; they both had a blue IBM logo on them...

Green covers were, if I recall correctly, normally "Student Text" documents. Theoretically, they should have gone through the same edits, but that was often done by instructors or others not in the development groups. Regular SRLs were created by pub groups within the development organization.

"Red Books" are more recent and usually written by field people versus those from formal development organizations. Sometimes, there are also users on the Red Book teams. While they go through an 'edit' process, the person doing the editing is usually doing more of a grammatical edit than a technical edit. The editor _should_ catch that kind of thing, but I don't think they go through the kinds of text scanning looking for 'style points' like regular SRL manuals.

However, it WAS a long time ago and I don't feel strongly enough about it to insist... :-)


IBM is very careful about things like that, but humans being what they are, and because IBM does not have a lawyer review every writing from its employees, there are cases where errors slip through. When I have an opportunity, I often suggest to those individuals that they should correct their text.

And, FWIW, the 'I' was never for 'International' but simply a Roman Numeral 'I'.

Yes, I know that is the official IBM position and I have heard this from several IBM managers.

Obviously we have experienced history from different perspectives. :-) It was while I was working for IBM at Hursley Park that I was told this story, by someone who claimed to have been on the development team. Who knows? It sounded plausible and I believed him.

I was on the IBM Pre-Announce Team for S/360. And, I struggled through a number of the V1.0 beta releases of the PL/I(F) Compiler that just happened to appear on my desk. [Does 'DTR' ring a bell with you?] Somewhere in the basement, I may even have one of the early manuals that said "New Programming Language" on the cover.

Since Hursley was where the original development of PL/I was done, it is likely that you ran into some of the old PL/I group. But, the PL/I mission was moved to Palo Alto and then to the Santa Teresa Lab. To keep the Hursley group busy, they got CICS and [parts of] TCAM.

Carl
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Basic structure COBOL
    ... It was originally PL/I as you state. ... IBM believed everyone would move ... While they go through an 'edit' process, ... Since Hursley was where the original development of PL/I was done, ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)
  • IBM MANUALS
    ... ibm laptop computers manuals ... ibm thinkpad 750 ce user manuals ... free ibm wheelwriter typewriter manuals free ...
    (sci.lang.translation.marketplace)
  • Re: COMPILER PERFORMANCE
    ... IBM did produce a statement to inform users how to write efficient code ... for the PL/I-F compiler. ... Fortran to S/360 PL/I. ... We even threatened to acquire a CDC machine and not even try to do further conversions to PL/I. ...
    (comp.lang.pl1)
  • Re: COMPILER PERFORMANCE
    ... IBM did produce a statement to inform users how to write efficient code ... That was before the compiler was released. ... Fortran to S/360 PL/I. ...
    (comp.lang.pl1)
  • Re: Put out to Pasture ?
    ... WalterR wrote: ... COBOL because IBM urged them to, explaining that PL/I demand is insufficient and that COBOL therefore will be the greater beneficiary of language/compiler development going forward. ...
    (comp.lang.pl1)