> Who does that leave? The obvious; your claim is untrue and it is you.
> Put up or shut up. PL/I does not have computed GO TO. It has LABEL arrays, which are more useful. There may be cases where a computed GO TO would be clearer if it exiasted, but good or bad, PL/I doesn't have it. > Read what I wrote. I did; it's BS. > White space has noting to do with it. That's a perfect example of BS. In FORTRAN, DO 500 I=1.10 is an assignment statement because the blanks are not significant. In PL/I, DO I=1.10; is still a DO statement, because spaces are not allowed inside a variable name. ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> on behalf of Robin Vowels <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2022 9:51 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: PL/I question On 2022-03-30 00:06, Seymour J Metz wrote: > It's obvious that one of us doesn't know what he's talking about, And it's not me. Who does that leave? > especially as you cited things that don't even exist in PL/I as being > derived from FORTRAN. Put up or shut up. > And you still haven't answered whether you > seriouslyu believe thaat the FORTRAN DO resembles the PL/I DO more > than the ALGOL FOR statement does. Read what I wrote. > Your purported explanation of the difference in DO between FORTRAN and > PL/I is ludicrous, because the rules for "white spacew" in FORTRAN and > PL/I are very different. White space has noting to do with it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
