I guess I'm learning COBOL then! C11 is a little too abstract anyway. (at least, GCC makes it abstract)
On Wed, Aug 03, 2016 at 02:41:29PM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
Politics of IT in the U.S. government http://www.itworld.com/article/3103585/government-it/politics-blamed-for-feds-reliance-on-old-it.html Hi all, In the preceding article, put away all the politics: That's not the subject of my email. At first I almost vomited when reading this sentence: ================================================ The Social Security Administration, for instance, has more than 60 million lines of Cobol, ================================================ My first thought: Cobol? Are you kidding? I thought I'd gotten done with that in 1985! And then a part of my mind said "sysvinit? Are you kidding? Etc. So I started thinking about it. Except for the lack of local variables (and this is a huge lack, in my opinion), Cobol was a pretty decent language. When it came to letters and numbers and data, it got the job done. For its time, it was pretty portable: You just changed the Environment Division. And it wasn't tough to learn or write, always assuming you were a fast, prolific touch typist.
--
___________________________________________________
( Shoot first and call whatever you hit the target. )
---------------------------------------------------
o ^__^
o (--)\_______
(__)\ )\/\
||----w |
|| ||
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Dng mailing list [email protected] https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
