PL/C was an interesting compiler. It provided the capability to correct many common coding errors.
Unfortunately, there was no guarantee that it would correct the coding error in the way you might expect. You could actually give PL/C no input. I would then detect the lack of a "MAIN" procedure and would then build a dummy "MAIN" procedure. John P Baker Software Engineer -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Schmidt Sent: Sunday, March 26, 2006 23:12 To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Wonder why IBM code quality is suffering? On Sun, 26 Mar 2006 19:33:18 -0500, Richard Tsujimoto wrote: >Jeez, (IIRC) I still remember it being PL/C. No, PL/C was Cornell University's student PL/1 compiler. (I remember it, too; Waterloo had it as one of their batch compilers, as did ISU and many other colleges and universities around the world.) The PL/X genealogy included PL/S and PL/AS, but not PL/C. -- Tom Schmidt Madison, WI ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
