What should be added to C, call it PL/2

[guy at sun.UUCP]

> >You don't want to call it PL/2 anyway because it's not PL/1 it is PL/I.
> 
> On Multics (the distant ancestor of UNIX), it's PL/1; the compiler is
> called "pl1", programs are foo.pl1, etc.  Considering the (historical)

So what?  GE/Honeywell didn't invent the language, IBM did, so if IBM says
it's PL/I it's PL/I.  Furthermore, the fact that the command name of the
compiler, and the language suffix, is ".pl1" doesn't mean that the
language's name is PL/1; what does the Multics *documentation* call it?

> But then, Multics PL/1 is a systems programming language, used to
> write most of the system, and is somewhat different (in programming
> environment, at least) from IBM PL/I.

The language Multics is implemented in is quite recognizable as PL/I, and
isn't some other language called "PL/1".  It was used as a systems
programming language, but it isn't a systems programming language in the
sense that that's *all* it could be used for.  It implemented all the other
grot, so you could write a payroll program in Multics PL/I if you were so
inclined.
-- 
	Guy Harris
	{ihnp4, decvax, seismo, decwrl, ...}!sun!guy
	guy at sun.com (or guy at sun.arpa)