In <0561414464209067.wa.bakersmagmail....@listserv.ua.edu>, on
10/02/2013
at 08:32 AM, M Baker <baker...@gmail.com> said:
>Or perhaps from an alternate history perspective, whether PL/1
>would have proven "up to the task" functionally at that point ?
PL/1 proved itself to be up to the task on Multics, but they had a
better compiler. The issue for OS/360 was probably not the
functionality of the language but the quality of the code generated by
IBM's compilers.
>And was PL/1 ever really implemented on predecessors to the 360
NICOL on the 7094 was derived from PL/1. Burroughs had a PL/1
complier, but I don't know whether it ran on the B5x00.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
