X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-TCPREMOTEIP: 207.224.51.38
X-Authenticated-UID: jpd AT noqsi DOT com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
Subject: Re: [geda-user] gEDA/gschem still alive?
From: John Doty <jpd AT noqsi DOT com>
In-Reply-To: <CAM2RGhTRQCA5D=1XB2yELZ47nF9uu247CbJjOrJ82EJMNwPAfw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 2015 08:40:17 -0600
Message-Id: <A762D642-FE18-4EA4-9A55-EDBBB0A830F0@noqsi.com>
References: <1435510363 DOT 682 DOT 26 DOT camel AT ssalewski DOT de> <20150703030409 DOT 32398 DOT qmail AT stuge DOT se> <CAM2RGhSb=z35RYaJQmh-S4N73ng9WOj4ySmy_05J-7KGdBv8SA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <CAOP4iL3VBaS+bJhKJDk=_iuBSjDPY2-pvMdz5zPnf7A_rwD0Jw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <20150703191532 DOT GB21182 AT localhost DOT localdomain> <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1507040542390 DOT 6924 AT igor2priv> <20150705021010 DOT 369968038A2C AT turkos DOT aspodata DOT se> <CAM2RGhTRQCA5D=1XB2yELZ47nF9uu247CbJjOrJ82EJMNwPAfw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id t66EeSLn023297
Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


On Jul 4, 2015, at 9:28 PM, Evan Foss (evanfoss AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] <geda-user AT delorie DOT com> wrote:

> Imagine if the source was written in PL/I. How much development in the
> future would you expect it to get?

I suspect the majority on this list lack much understanding of the reference. PL/I(F) was the fourth programming language I learned, and later I used Multics PL/I and PL/M for a variety of purposes.

PL/I(F) was extremely feature-rich, and that was its downfall. There were too many subtle pitfalls the programmer had to watch out for. Innocent-looking expressions like “N/3” could do crazy things.

It’s proof that the quality of the designer is not a good predictor of the quality of the product. The designers and promoters of PL/I included many of the leading computer scientists of the 1960’s. So, don’t take it to heart when somebody criticizes your software. Good ideas can lead to bad software, especially *too many* good ideas.

Later dialects like PL/I(G) and PL/M were simplified, with many features removed. PL/M’s semantics were similar to C. These never achieved the the status C achieved from being the implementation language of a powerful general-purpose OS running on cost-effective hardware. Alternate history fans might ponder what computing would be like today if MSDOS had used PL/M.

John Doty              Noqsi Aerospace, Ltd.
http://www.noqsi.com/
jpd AT noqsi DOT com