This makes CPL seem like a pretty odd choice of language for such a widely-read magazine article. He couldn't have expected his readers to be familiar with it, especially since the language was still changing at the time. Did he think it was close enough to pseudo-code that it was ok?
Readers at the time would have expected to do somewhat more work to understand a program; ASCII had only recently been standardised, so even programs in the same language would have slightly different syntax, depending on the computer they were written for (also see stropping: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stropping_%28programming%29 ).
But fundamentally, he was the designer and major promoter of CPL.
