Hello all,
There is a future for COBOL ?
How many COBOL language vendors are there today?
Hello all,"Grandpa COBOL ainrCOt goinrCO away any time soon"
There is a future for COBOL ?
How many COBOL language vendors are there today?
Writing new COBOL programs using webservice, xml, sql db is good choice?
What is everyone's option?
Regards
Gilberto Junior
Hello all,
There is a future for COBOL ?
How many COBOL language vendors are there today?
Writing new COBOL programs using webservice, xml, sql db is good
choice?
What is everyone's option?
How many COBOL language vendors are there today?
On Monday, April 3, 2017 at 11:24:01 PM UTC+12, Gilberto Junior wrote:is, in general, expensive to use or learn, and especially to deploy because of run-time costs.
How many COBOL language vendors are there today?
The important point to note is that they are _vendors_. This means that COBOL
There is OpenCOBOL/GNUCOBOL which is free, but is of a 30 year old standard(1985) with extensions. Most other modern popular languages are available for free in the latest standards.
On Monday, April 3, 2017 at 11:24:01 PM UTC+12, Gilberto Junior wrote:
How many COBOL language vendors are there today?
The important point to note is that they are _vendors_. This means
that COBOL is, in general, expensive to use or learn, and especially
to deploy because of run-time costs.
There is OpenCOBOL/GNUCOBOL which is free, but is of a 30 year old
standard (1985) with extensions. Most other modern popular languages
are available for free in the latest standards.
Hello Richard!
Thursday April 06 2017 23:41, Richard wrote to All:
> On Monday, April 3, 2017 at 11:24:01 PM UTC+12, Gilberto Junior wrote:
>> How many COBOL language vendors are there today?
> The important point to note is that they are _vendors_. This means
> that COBOL is, in general, expensive to use or learn, and especially
> to deploy because of run-time costs.
> There is OpenCOBOL/GNUCOBOL which is free, but is of a 30 year old
> standard (1985) with extensions. Most other modern popular languages
> are available for free in the latest standards.
Not correct - as of v2.0 rc-3 and earlier it uses (like all vendors)
various extentions as issued in 2014 from document :
INCITS/ISO/IEC 1989:2014 [2014]
and a fair few that are not in above doc.
Updates | mods | Extra features, occur daily and the souces are available immediately.
Now tell me what other compiler developer supplies sources (or binaries)
that quick even remotely ?
Vince
Hello all,
There is a future for COBOL ?
How many COBOL language vendors are there today?
Writing new COBOL programs using webservice, xml, sql db is good choice?
What is everyone's option?
No, writing webservices in COBOL is NOT a good choice (especially if youIBM came up with a scheme to process XML in COBOL using COBOL data structures. I disliked that idea but it may have made XML processing reasonably easy. Otherwise, reading XML in COBOL is just a matter of using a suitable module or library. Calling the module should result a data table of the names and values.
are still using SOAP), XML in COBOL is painful
compared to LINQ to XML,What has been learned and often used to is always easier than something not done before.
Embedded SQL in COBOL using ODBC (as is usual for Fujitsu, for example)In my tests ODBC is always slower than directly accessing the database directly. The alleged advantage of ODBC is that it provides a common access to all manner of databases. The downside is that it is several layers of interpreting, rewriting, and reformatting. I am not surprised that you found it
is obsolete and an order of magnitude slower than LINQ to SQL (which
doesn't need ODBC, although you CAN do it that way). Our tests showed
that replacing ESQL with LINQ increased performance by up to 5 times.
LINQ and C# are a FREE download; COBOL is.... NOT.Hey, wait a minute. :-)
On Monday, April 10, 2017 at 8:45:19 PM UTC-4, pete dashwood wrote:
LINQ and C# are a FREE download; COBOL is.... NOT.
Hey, wait a minute. :-)
You aren't allowed to say that anymore, Peter. Because, yes, COBOL *is*
a FREE download. Not only cost free, but freedom free as well.
And you use these sources How, Vince?
Have you moved into compiler maintenance in C for your hobby
programming? :-)
Seriously, GNU COBOL is an excellent project and I'd use it in a
heartbeat if it supported OO COBOL and a COM interface.
On Monday, April 10, 2017 at 8:45:19 PM UTC-4, pete dashwood wrote:FREE download. Not only cost free, but freedom free as well.
LINQ and C# are a FREE download; COBOL is.... NOT.
Hey, wait a minute. :-)
You aren't allowed to say that anymore, Peter. Because, yes, COBOL *is* a
Does GnuCOBOL currently integrate seamlessly in your (I'm going to sayrelatively narrow **) view of the computing world? Nope, not really.
Does GnuCOBOL integrate with (I just counted the other day) 45 otherprogramming languages, over a dozen large frameworks, and nearing one hundred libraries? Yes. Proven to, with FREE download sources, ready to be modified and put to use on the task at hand.
**: explaining the relatively narrow view thing. Of the billions andbillions of lines of COBOL running right now, how many are LINQ ready, or even care that they are or are not LINQ ready?
COBOL has a a very strong position within certain domains of use. Steppingoutside those domains, and you might as well use Python, or Perl, or Java or C#
I find that GnuCOBOL offers a little bit of an in/out for COBOL usage. Youcan take existent COBOL and compile it on lots of different platforms with very
The future may be; Android based gorilla glass interfaces in front of usersand console, text based, servers in the back room. Do you want COBOL on the gorilla glass? Not really. Do you want Windows or X11 on the core servers? Not really. In between is just the desktop, and all you may really need out of
Of course my crystal ball is not very powerful, and for now there are veryfew choices that can't end in success to some extent in the short term. Computing is still that young, just about everything produced can be and is used.
Due to the fragmentation. there will always be more people laughing orscoffing at the choices of others as not worthy than the people that understand
Point of example, Peter. I happen to think my Rock of COBOL beats yourScissors of C#. :-) But I'm guessing that we both realize that that is a pretty circular argument when you look at the game from above.
On 11/04/2017 9:32 p.m., bwtif...@....com wrote:
FREE download. Not only cost free, but freedom free as well.On Monday, April 10, 2017 at 8:45:19 PM UTC-4, pete dashwood wrote:
LINQ and C# are a FREE download; COBOL is.... NOT.
Hey, wait a minute. :-)
You aren't allowed to say that anymore, Peter. Because, yes, COBOL *is* a
Fair point :-)
I'll qualify that statement to exclude GNU COBOL in the future.
On Thursday, April 13, 2017 at 3:23:20 AM UTC-4, pete dashwood wrote:compiler is Object COBOL ready for .NET as well. *But for that, I'm going on glancing at web pages, not experience or trials.*
On 11/04/2017 9:32 p.m., bwtif...@....com wrote:
On Monday, April 10, 2017 at 8:45:19 PM UTC-4, pete dashwood wrote:
LINQ and C# are a FREE download; COBOL is.... NOT.
Hey, wait a minute. :-)
You aren't allowed to say that anymore, Peter. Because, yes, COBOL *is* a FREE download. Not only cost free, but freedom free as well.
Fair point :-)
I'll qualify that statement to exclude GNU COBOL in the future.
Add Raincode as well. Royalty free, free download. I'm pretty sure the
To the rest, I'm just going to keep calling Rock Scissors Paper. Any choicewe make in the field is worthy, you will win some, lose some, tie some, depending at were you stand in the circle. And from the the right point of view, we probably aren't lying to people when we say any particular choice is win/win/tie. And another's opinion probably isn't lying when they call that same stance a lose/lose/tie.
Confirmation bias is awesome. As it stands, my cognitive filters find ithard to believe that a bank is running Windows in the back room, but I'm willing to admit that there might be a reverse Halo effect (and other prejudice) at play setting the tone of that belief. Front facing? Sure. Back office? hrrmm, can't turn off the filters of suspicion.
I'm also firmly in the camp that believes COBOL has a solid future and isworthy of consideration for new development, especially in certain domains of use.
On three; 1, 2, ROCK. :-)
Have good,
Brian
There is no "Back Office" as the term was once understood,
with delayed transactions applied by overnight batch processing.
I'm not
sure, but I imagine they still use mainframes for consolidating and >analyzing the on-line databases (Big Data).
On Monday, April 3, 2017 at 7:24:01 AM UTC-4, Gilberto Junior wrote:
Hello all,
There is a future for COBOL ?
How many COBOL language vendors are there today?
Writing new COBOL programs using webservice, xml, sql db is good choice?
What is everyone's option?
Regards
Gilberto Junior
"Grandpa COBOL ainrCOt goinrCO away any time soon"
< http://federalnewsradio.com/tom-temin-commentary/2017/04/grandpa-cobol-aint-goin-away-any-time-soon/ >
On 04/04/2017 16:01, Rick Smith wrote:[snip]
The choice of words was made by Tim Temin. While I don't know his"Grandpa COBOL ainrCOt goinrCO away any time soon"
Don't you mean Grandma?
< http://federalnewsradio.com/tom-temin-commentary/2017/04/grandpa-cobol-aint-goin-away-any-time-soon/ >
In article <eld8btFqtolU1@mid.individual.net>,
pete dashwood <dashwood@enternet.co.nz> wrote:
[snip]
There is no "Back Office" as the term was once understood,
with delayed transactions applied by overnight batch processing.
Mr Dashwood, you've made this assertion before and you've ignored the examples of National Tax Systems, State Tax Systems, Retirement Benefits Systems, Insurance Claim Systems and sundry other multi-billion-US$
systems which prove this assertion to be wrong.
I'm not
sure, but I imagine they still use mainframes for consolidating and
analyzing the on-line databases (Big Data).
'There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.' - some Auld Blighty blighter.
DD
On Sunday, April 16, 2017 at 10:11:07 AM UTC-4, ck wrote:
On 04/04/2017 16:01, Rick Smith wrote:
[snip]
"Grandpa COBOL ainrCOt goinrCO away any time soon"
Don't you mean Grandma?
< http://federalnewsradio.com/tom-temin-commentary/2017/04/grandpa-cobol-aint-goin-away-any-time-soon/ >
The choice of words was made by Tim Temin. While I don't know his
intent in using 'Grandpa', it seems to me that it was more in the
sense of two generations removed from the present. He used 'grandfather'
in another article on COBOL. "I canrCOt find the obituary for COBOL".
< http://federalnewsradio.com/tom-temin-commentary/2015/11/cant-find-obituary-cobol/ >
Quotes: -----
"The common business-oriented language (COBOL) debuted in 1959. Like
the B-52, the programming language has evolved a lot during its many iterations. Experts have been complaining about it almost since its inception, but COBOL programs persist."
"When you hear, as we do every filing season, that the IRS runs
'systems from the Kennedy administration,' critics are trying to say, although they donrCOt know it, that the original logic written in some
early version of COBOL is still running. The hardware, of course, has
been replaced multiple times and IrCOd guess the code has been refreshed.
IRS programmers rework it every year because the tax laws change."
"In the meantime, while itrCOs true current pilots might be flying the
same planes their grandfathers flew, theyrCOre not using the same
avionics or electronic warfare systems."
"The government relies on some old stuff, like the B-52 and COBOL applications." [Caption under image of B-52.]
-----
If "two generations removed" was the intent and understood, then
using "Grandma" would have been fine. Unfortunately, grandpa and
grandma could be inferred to mean 'old man COBOL' or 'old woman
COBOL' and, to some, 'old woman COBOL' might be construed jocularly!
I would have preferred that Mr Temin not have used 'Grandpa' and
trust that GMH would have agreed.
"Grandpa COBOL ainrCOt goinrCO away any time soon"
Don't you mean Grandma?
You are right that COBOL should not be associated with "Old Women"...
"Grandpa COBOL ainrCOt goinrCO away any time soon"
Don't you mean Grandma?
You are right that COBOL should not be associated with "Old Women"...
As the group manager of the Grace Hopper Appreciation Society onI think what ck was getting at is that Grace Hopper is known as the "Grandmother of COBOL". Calling it "Grandma COBOL" would honor her.
LinkedIn, I'd just like to remind everyone what ck was getting at.
When she retired in 1986, she was, at the time, the oldest activeAll of which is irrelevant! My comment (elided) and Pete's agreement
service member in the U.S. Navy, being 80; so yeah, I think it's more
than ok that COBOL is associated with Old Women. :-)
On Sunday, April 23, 2017 at 9:25:23 PM UTC-4, bwti...@gmail.com wrote:
"Grandpa COBOL ainrCOt goinrCO away any time soon"
Don't you mean Grandma?
You are right that COBOL should not be associated with "Old Women"...
As the group manager of the Grace Hopper Appreciation Society on
LinkedIn, I'd just like to remind everyone what ck was getting at.
I think what ck was getting at is that Grace Hopper is known as the "Grandmother of COBOL". Calling it "Grandma COBOL" would honor her.
It was about (grand) parentage.
When she retired in 1986, she was, at the time, the oldest active
service member in the U.S. Navy, being 80; so yeah, I think it's more
than ok that COBOL is associated with Old Women. :-)
All of which is irrelevant! My comment (elided) and Pete's agreement
with that comment was about the connotation of the term "old woman".
Here's a definition from < http://www.dictionary.com/browse/old-woman >.
"2. a timid, fussy, or cautious person." This has nothing to do with
(grand) parentage and a lot to do with perception.
Would you want COBOL associated with "timid, fussy, or cautious"
(or worse)?
On 4/23/2017 11:00 PM, Rick Smith wrote:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grandma_Moses
On Sunday, April 23, 2017 at 9:25:23 PM UTC-4, bwti...@gmail.com wrote:
"Grandpa COBOL ainrCOt goinrCO away any time soon"
Don't you mean Grandma?
You are right that COBOL should not be associated with "Old Women"...
As the group manager of the Grace Hopper Appreciation Society on
LinkedIn, I'd just like to remind everyone what ck was getting at.
I think what ck was getting at is that Grace Hopper is known as the "Grandmother of COBOL". Calling it "Grandma COBOL" would honor her.
It was about (grand) parentage.
When she retired in 1986, she was, at the time, the oldest active
service member in the U.S. Navy, being 80; so yeah, I think it's more
than ok that COBOL is associated with Old Women. :-)
All of which is irrelevant! My comment (elided) and Pete's agreement
with that comment was about the connotation of the term "old woman".
Here's a definition from < http://www.dictionary.com/browse/old-woman >. "2. a timid, fussy, or cautious person." This has nothing to do with (grand) parentage and a lot to do with perception.
Would you want COBOL associated with "timid, fussy, or cautious"
(or worse)?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fauja_Singh
On 16/04/2017 1:32 a.m., docdwarf@panix.com wrote:
In article <eld8btFqtolU1@mid.individual.net>,Probably because I don't live in the United States.
pete dashwood <dashwood@enternet.co.nz> wrote:
[snip]
There is no "Back Office" as the term was once understood,
with delayed transactions applied by overnight batch processing.
Mr Dashwood, you've made this assertion before and you've ignored the
examples of National Tax Systems, State Tax Systems, Retirement Benefits
Systems, Insurance Claim Systems and sundry other multi-billion-US$
systems which prove this assertion to be wrong.
I'm not
sure, but I imagine they still use mainframes for consolidating and
analyzing the on-line databases (Big Data).
'There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in >> your philosophy.' - some Auld Blighty blighter.
I have never claimed that there are not still large mainframe based
systems running archaic code with archaic processes. However, most of
them are based in the USA. There are good reasons for this; it is much >harder to evolve your systems when you are dealing with hundreds of
millions of clients (like the systems you note) than it is when you are not.
The fact that these systems are alive and well, however, does NOT "prove
my assertion to be wrong". They are not the class of systems I was >discussing.
I'd just like to remind everyone what ck was getting at."Grandpa COBOL ainrCOt goinrCO away any time soon"
Don't you mean Grandma?
You are right that COBOL should not be associated with "Old Women"...
As the group manager of the Grace Hopper Appreciation Society on LinkedIn,
When she retired in 1986, she was, at the time, the oldest active servicemember in the U.S. Navy, being 80; so yeah, I think it's more than ok that COBOL is associated with Old Women. :-)
Cheers,
Brian
On 4/23/2017 11:00 PM, Rick Smith wrote:
On Sunday, April 23, 2017 at 9:25:23 PM UTC-4, bwti...@gmail.com wrote: >>>>>>> "Grandpa COBOL ainrCOt goinrCO away any time soon"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fauja_Singh
Don't you mean Grandma?
You are right that COBOL should not be associated with "Old Women"...
As the group manager of the Grace Hopper Appreciation Society on
LinkedIn, I'd just like to remind everyone what ck was getting at.
I think what ck was getting at is that Grace Hopper is known as the
"Grandmother of COBOL". Calling it "Grandma COBOL" would honor her.
It was about (grand) parentage.
When she retired in 1986, she was, at the time, the oldest active
service member in the U.S. Navy, being 80; so yeah, I think it's more
than ok that COBOL is associated with Old Women. :-)
All of which is irrelevant! My comment (elided) and Pete's agreement
with that comment was about the connotation of the term "old woman".
Here's a definition from < http://www.dictionary.com/browse/old-woman >.
"2. a timid, fussy, or cautious person." This has nothing to do with
(grand) parentage and a lot to do with perception.
Would you want COBOL associated with "timid, fussy, or cautious"
(or worse)?
| Sysop: | DaiTengu |
|---|---|
| Location: | Appleton, WI |
| Users: | 1,007 |
| Nodes: | 10 (1 / 9) |
| Uptime: | 184:44:25 |
| Calls: | 13,137 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 186,574 |
| D/L today: |
484 files (104M bytes) |
| Messages: | 3,305,063 |