Article View: comp.lang.misc
Article #1164Re: Structured Pgmming With GoTos (Re: do...while vs. repeat...until)
From: Richard Conto
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 1990 19:55
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 1990 19:55
39 lines
2894 bytes
2894 bytes
In article <148@garth.UUCP> phipps@garth.UUCP (Clay Phipps) writes:
>[The following thread has been abducted from "comp.lang.c":]
>
>>In article <KZB#G{_@rpi.edu>,
>>night@pawl.rpi.edu (Trip Martin) wrote:
>>>
>>> An interesting note [...] is how Plus, a little-known language [...],
> ^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^
>If you refer to the Programming Language for UNIVAC Systems (PLUS),
>I can understand why it might be "little-known". Many contemporary
>readers of this news-group probably assume that UNIVAC was a manufacturer
>of vacuum-cleaners (or whatever they are called Across The Pond).
Well, presuming that the fellow from rpi is familiar with MTS, I think that
the language "Plus" he refers to is not the UNIVAC language. (I think that
since RPI does have an MTS system, that Trip is familiar with the MTS version.)
I don't know if the MTS Plus has any relationship to the UNIVAC Plus. The
manual for the language claims descent from Pascal and "Sue". (Sue was
a language developed at the University of Toronto around 1971.) The MTS Plus
also claims influence from C. Plus has two looping constructs... the
"cycle" <statement-list>; "end cycle" construct, which is a basic infinite
loop that can be exited with a "return", "exit", or "goto" statement, and
a "do" construct (like the FORTRAN DO or the Pascal "for" statements.)
The "exit" statement is like C's "break" statement, although you can "exit"
to a a particular level, by using labeled looping statements. I happen to
like Plus better than C because it is more strongly typed. (It allows
"procedure types", which can be included as fields in arrays or structures,
which makes it a kind of object oriented language I suppose.) I also like
Plus because it has a real concept of strings, with string operators built
into the language. (But it doesn't let you define your own operators as C++
can.)
I also like the Plus compilers because they do a lot of checking that lint
would do for me seperately. I like to think it keeps my code a bit more
manageable....
--- Richard Conto (rsc@merit.edu or Richard_Conto@ummts.cc.umich.edu)
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1990Apr10.195558.28411@terminator.cc.umich.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!umich!terminator!merit.edu!rscReferences:
<16188@haddock.ima.isc.com> <9130009@hpavla.AVO.HP.COM> <IEC2SG5xds13@ficc.uu.net> <Mar.22.11.04.57.1990.7791@paul.rutgers.edu> <KZB#G{_@rpi.edu> <5826.260b6a7e@vax1.tcd.ie> <148@garth.UUCP>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!umich!terminator!merit.edu!rsc
From: rsc@merit.edu (Richard Conto)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: Structured Pgmming With GoTos (Re: do...while vs. repeat...until)
Keywords: Obscure Languages
Message-ID: <1990Apr10.195558.28411@terminator.cc.umich.edu>
Date: 10 Apr 90 19:55:58 GMT
References: <16188@haddock.ima.isc.com> <9130009@hpavla.AVO.HP.COM> <IEC2SG5xds13@ficc.uu.net> <Mar.22.11.04.57.1990.7791@paul.rutgers.edu> <KZB#G{_@rpi.edu> <5826.260b6a7e@vax1.tcd.ie> <148@garth.UUCP>
Sender: usenet@terminator.cc.umich.edu (usenet news)
Reply-To: rsc@merit.edu (Richard Conto)
Organization: U of Michigan, Merit Network
Lines: 39