Ryan continued a long debate: > It basically created boiler plate code that could read and write the > data in the format that COBOL dictated. It also created c# classes > from those definitions, that were actually usable in the .net world. > The layout in memory was not the same as the COBOL object definition. > I know COBOL can define fields over field boundaries, but I dont > recall if our generator supported that.
When I first learned COBOL, it Was during my second year varsity studies of OO[1], but this hadn't sank in enough yet, and I went out of my way to, in Turbo Pascal, recreate this seemingly wonderful anachronism of COBOL. It just seemed so much better, with less hassle etc., than individually assigning fields. Maybe the OP's client feels the same way. =================================== This list is hosted by DevelopMentor® http://www.develop.com View archives and manage your subscription(s) at http://discuss.develop.com
