I'm only an outsider, so I everything I say is only rumors. On the other hand, my job won't be threatened if I tell them, as insiders might be.
PL/S, PL/AS, PL/X, etc. are PL/I-like system programming languages. (Kind of like C is in the Unix world.) PL/S originally was invented at Stanford -- they published a pape r on it (which I read in the UCSC library). The idea was to improve the productivity of IBMs own programmers. They ev en published a manual to help us systems programmers read PL/S listing. (Wish I still ha d my copy!) Then IBM came up with restricted source and later OCO. (The SHARE song says "to be at the good old rising sun, they came up with restrict".) They apparently felt that protecting P L/X was required as part of this nonsense. The Japanese threat has evaporated, but the MVS (oops, z/O S) world still thinks that z/OS source code is an asset that must be protected at all costs. (S omeone might actually come up something better. Horrors!) For years, the IBMers who own PL/X ha ve kept it under wraps for no good reason that I can see. In the last couple of years there have been sessions on PL/X in the MVS group at SHARE (with handouts on the language!). They are thinkin g about releasing the PL/X language -- but only if they can make money at it. (Don't hold your breath! We in the SHARE VM community (and others) fought long and hard to keep VM source open. That's why it mostly is, and also why the PL/X source remains available. Unfortu nately, parts of VM were written in PL/X. As Melinda Varian said "I want to fix it in the language it broke in". Without a PL/X compiler available to customers, you cannot do that. If you are a vendor, you can get access to the PL/X compiler, so you can make modifications in support of your products. I don't know what the current rules and restric tions are on this privilege, though. On Sat, 4 Feb 2006 17:16:10 -0700, Jack Woehr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Alan Altmark wrote: > >>And VM *still* bucks the trend even today. We continue to ship source and >>source maintenence, aren't worried about people seeing PL/X source, >> >> >While we're on the subject, what the heck was that about? > >I encountered PL/X in 1994 and thought it was right jolly, and then >discovered >that IBM wanted to keep it out of people's hands. > >Seemed silly then. Seems silly now. > >Now, if they would only find a way to keep C# out of people's hands ... :-) > >-- >Jack J. Woehr # "Men never do evil so completely and >PO Box 51, Golden, CO 80402 # cheerfully as when they do it from >http://www.well.com/~jax # religious conviction." - Pascal >======================== ========================= ========== ==============
