cobol? 
Author Message
 cobol?

Hi!

I've been thinking about maybe learning cobol. How hard do you think
that would be (I allready have some general knowledge of programming
(some Pascal, some c++, some smltlk...))?
And, is there an OO-thing happening with cobol too? I mean like how c
has gone OO in c++, and pascal in delphi...
And, do you know of any downloadable compilers/tutorials?
And, what books do think should fit my purpose?
And finally,
should I even bother?

Daniel



Sun, 14 Nov 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 cobol?

Hi,

If you have time to waste, hair to cut and if you like to write 100 lines
code when it takes 10 with an other language, COBOL is for you. The last
official norm is cobol 1985 where are 1997???

I learned cobol at university and now ? what to do with COBOL?

Have a good night...



Quote:
> Hi!

> I've been thinking about maybe learning cobol. How hard do you think
> that would be (I allready have some general knowledge of programming
> (some pascal, some c++, some smltlk...))?
> And, is there an OO-thing happening with cobol too? I mean like how c
> has gone OO in c++, and pascal in delphi...
> And, do you know of any downloadable compilers/tutorials?
> And, what books do think should fit my purpose?
> And finally,
> should I even bother?

> Daniel



Sun, 14 Nov 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 cobol?

Quote:

> Hi!

> I've been thinking about maybe learning cobol. How hard do you think
> that would be (I allready have some general knowledge of programming
> (some pascal, some c++, some smltlk...))?

Are you going to learn cobol just for fun or do you need it for your
job/school?  If it's just for fun, I would not learn COBOL.  If you want
to learn something really different, learn Prolog or Lisp.  It's a
completely different way of thinking!

Concerning COBOL, it's the most used programming language and it's
becomming more and more Pascal-like.  Since COBOL 85, the language has
become a good programming language.  An X/Open compliant COBOL compiler,
like e.g. Micro Focus, even supports free-form sources!  Now in fact
there are only small differences between all these languages.  Most of
the people that are against COBOL don't know anything about COBOL and
are only repeating what some people are saying, or are comparing with
COBOL 68.  COBOL has evolved a lot in the positive way since the 68
standard.
With a Pascal background, it's easy to write COBOL programs.  You will
find similar structures/concepts: loops, functions (= paragraphs), ...

Quote:
> And, is there an OO-thing happening with cobol too? I mean like how c
> has gone OO in c++, and pascal in delphi...

COBOL-97 is object oriented.  But I don't think it's a good idea for you
to use it.  I understand that people with a deep COBOL background are
going to use it, but if you can choose an OO-language to develop new
programs in, there are better alternatives depending on the kind of
software you're going to develop. e.g. Java, C++, Delphi.  I think they
are better, because they are from the ground up OO and you will have
better development environments and tools, faster compilers, etc.

Quote:
> And, do you know of any downloadable compilers/tutorials?

There is a free COBOL compiler for Windows available from Fujitsu:
www.adtools.com


Belgium



Mon, 15 Nov 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 cobol?


Quote:
> going to use it, but if you can choose an OO-language to develop new
> programs in, there are better alternatives depending on the kind of
> software you're going to develop. e.g. Java, C++, Delphi.  I think they
> are better, because they are from the ground up OO and you will have
> better development environments and tools, faster compilers, etc.

In what way is C++ 'OO from the ground up' ?  At the lowest level
it is just C, in fact it was originally implemented by cform
which converted th C++ to straight C for compiling.

Delphi ?  Just Borland's Pascal in a fancy IDE with objects
added on.

Java ?  Yes maybe, but it hardly counts in having better development
environments or faster compilers - yet.

In general the issue of 'faster compilers' tends to show that you
are using an environment that forces you to sit staring at the
screen while the compiles take place.  In my view these are poor
(but pretty) tools.  My compiles take place in background while
I get on with useful work.  Under Windows many compilers nominally
run in background, but the foreground is still unusable.



Mon, 15 Nov 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 cobol?

Quote:

> .. snip ..
> COBOL-97 is object oriented.  But I don't think it's a good idea for you
> to use it.  I understand that people with a deep COBOL background are
> going to use it, but if you can choose an OO-language to develop new
> programs in, there are better alternatives depending on the kind of
> software you're going to develop. e.g. Java, C++, Delphi.  I think they
> are better, because they are from the ground up OO and you will have
> better development environments and tools, faster compilers, etc.

First let me say that I have NO disagreements with your opinions.
However, in a business environment the choice of the programming
language cannot always be determined by what's technically elegant.

If the business DATA is on the mainframe, and considerations like
security, peformance, scalability, etc., require that the DATA be kept
on the mainframe, then you'd probably want the majority of the code
execution also to be on the mainframe.  For THAT part of programming,  
COBOL remains the language of choice.  Yes, JAVA is coming to the
mainframe, but from what I have seen of that language on the PCs, it
is going to be a while before its dependability and performance
come up to COBOL's standards.

Regards,
Bal
--

http://www.geocities.com/~oberoi/mainfrme.html
-----
"The universe is full of magical things,
patiently waiting for our wits to grow sharper." - Eden Phillpotts



Tue, 16 Nov 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 cobol?

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------061220D2700A07B6034DDAAB
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Quote:

> If you have time to waste, hair to cut and if you like to write 100
> lines
> code when it takes 10 with an other language, COBOL is for you. The
> last
> official norm is cobol 1985 where are 1997???

> I learned cobol at university and now ? what to do with COBOL?


> > Hi!

> > I've been thinking about maybe learning cobol. How hard do you
> think
> > that would be (I allready have some general knowledge of
> programming
> > (some pascal, some c++, some smltlk...))?
> > And, is there an OO-thing happening with cobol too? I mean like
> how c
> > has gone OO in c++, and pascal in delphi...

Oh gosh!  Who's first?  Bags me.

This is just the sort of ignorant, unintelligent, uninformed,
juvenile, smug claptrap that I had to face a couple of years back
doing the postgrad thing at university.  It's also the usual stupid
{*filter*}that one gets from, usually C/C++ guys who are too stupid to see
the benefits of a well-defined language and are too stupid to note its
widespread real-world use.  Dis I say say stupid?  I've just noticed
that the idiot's in Belgium - say no more.

Charles

--------------061220D2700A07B6034DDAAB
Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="vcard.vcf"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: Card for Charles Hankel
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="vcard.vcf"

begin:          vcard
fn:             Charles Hankel
n:              Hankel;Charles
org:            Freedom Bird Ltd
adr:            38 Borough Way;;;Wallasey;Merseyside;L44 6QU;United Kingdom

title:          Director
tel;work:       0151-639 9839
tel;fax:        0151-200 1957
x-mozilla-cpt:  ;0
x-mozilla-html: FALSE
end:            vcard

--------------061220D2700A07B6034DDAAB--



Thu, 18 Nov 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 cobol?

Quote:

> This is just the sort of ignorant, unintelligent, uninformed,
> juvenile, smug claptrap that I had to face a couple of years back
> doing the postgrad thing at university.  It's also the usual stupid
> {*filter*}that one gets from, usually C/C++ guys who are too stupid to see
> the benefits of a well-defined language and are too stupid to note its
> widespread real-world use.  Dis I say say stupid?  I've just noticed
> that the idiot's in Belgium - say no more.

> Charles

Wow Charles!  What an ignorant, unintelligent, uninformed and juvenile
remark about Belgians.  I hope all British COBOL programmers are not
like you...


Belgium



Fri, 19 Nov 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 cobol?

Quote:

>Hi,
>If you have time to waste, hair to cut and if you like to write 100 lines
>code when it takes 10 with an other language, COBOL is for you. The last
>official norm is cobol 1985 where are 1997???
>I learned cobol at university and now ? what to do with COBOL?

Getr a Job.

While COBOL may not be the programing language of choise today there
are still hundreds of thousands of companies out there that still use
it.  Be it Legacy code or new systems (and COBOL is still the best
language to do Accounting programming in) it's going to be arround for
quite some time.  

If only the fortunate few would not rip off the 'companies' there
would be more work for the rest of us.  $125k for 3 , 8 hour days a
week.. come on guys..



Fri, 19 Nov 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 cobol?

Quote:

> Hi,

> If you have time to waste, hair to cut and if you like to write 100 lines
> code when it takes 10 with an other language, COBOL is for you.

I always like these statements from types who have probably never
coded a serious application in COBOL.  It takes hundreds of lines of C
or similar languages to equal one line of COBOL.  He has the ratio
backwards.

Quote:
>The last
> official norm is cobol 1985 where are 1997???

It's coming along.  How about 2000?  This is certainly a legitimate
gripe about COBOL.

Quote:
> I learned cobol at university and now ? what to do with COBOL?

There are lots of jobs out there.  He must not read the news group or
the papers often.

--
Don Nelson
COBOL Development, Tandem Computers, Inc.
Member, ANSI X3J4 and ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22 WG4 COBOL Committees

No clever quotes here



Sun, 21 Nov 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 cobol?

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------9E846C4DA08A2E0CC7543E30
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Quote:


> > This is just the sort of ignorant, unintelligent, uninformed,
> > juvenile, smug claptrap that I had to face a couple of years back
> > doing the postgrad thing at university.  It's also the usual
> stupid
> > {*filter*}that one gets from, usually C/C++ guys who are too stupid to
> see
> > the benefits of a well-defined language and are too stupid to note
> its
> > widespread real-world use.  Dis I say say stupid?  I've just
> noticed
> > that the idiot's in Belgium - say no more.

> > Charles

> Wow Charles!  What an ignorant, unintelligent, uninformed and
> juvenile
> remark about Belgians.  I hope all British COBOL programmers are not

> like you...

Did I say anything about Belgians?  Not exactly.  If we had space here
for it, and I had the time and the inclination to go into detail, I
could illustrate that most of the irrational events to affect my life
occurred in Belgium.  I, therefore, have cause to suspect that most of
the irrational people in the world also occur in Belgium.  His
statements were irrational, to say the least, and he appears to live
in Belgium.  QED

Charles

--------------9E846C4DA08A2E0CC7543E30
Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="vcard.vcf"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: Card for Charles Hankel
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="vcard.vcf"

begin:          vcard
fn:             Charles Hankel
n:              Hankel;Charles
org:            Freedom Bird Ltd
adr:            38 Borough Way;;;Wallasey;Merseyside;L44 6QU;United Kingdom

title:          Director
tel;work:       0151-639 9839
tel;fax:        0151-200 1957
x-mozilla-cpt:  ;0
x-mozilla-html: FALSE
end:            vcard

--------------9E846C4DA08A2E0CC7543E30--



Tue, 23 Nov 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 
 [ 10 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. COBOL COBOL COBOL

2. COBOL//COBOL//COBOL

3. COBOL COBOL COBOL

4. COBOL-COBOL-COBOL

5. How compatible are RM Cobol and MF Cobol.

6. IBM COBOL post-VS COBOL II

7. tandem COBOL to IBM Mainframe MVS COBOL Conversion

8. Microfocus Cobol Migration to IBM Cobol for AIX

9. Old RM-COBOL UNIX programmer seeking info on move to COBOL/400 on AS/400

10. cobol runtime error 46 for cobol 85

11. IBM COBOL to HP-UX COBOL

12. Differnece between Cobol and Cobol II

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software