On Mon, 6 Oct 2008 09:51:28 -0700, Tom Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>IMHO, the only reasonable excuse for keeping OS/VS Cobol around is not >>>having the source code to recompile. >> >>Unfortunately, that is a common problem. > >Although it was solved years ago by Source Recovery Company. They are >still taking OS/VS COBOL (and other modules) and returning COBOL source >code today! http://www.source-recovery.com/ > >I think the biggest hindrance to moving applications forward is extremely >cautious applications support personnel. Many times I hear that they are >afraid to re-link, much less recompile! > >Cheers, >TomR >> COBOL is the Language of the Future! << One thing that I've read about the recovered source is that the data names are not really descriptive. Granted that if you give them a COBOL compiled program, they will give you back some COBOL source which, if compiled with the same compiler and options, will result in a functionally identical (if not 100% identical?) executable. But modifying that might be a hair tearing experience. No COPY code. Can they even tell you if two separate data names are in the same 01 or not? I definitely would not want to main such code. It might be OK to use as a sort of template to write an entirely new program. I.e. extract the encoded business logic. The caution that you mention is fairly ingrained in most COBOL programmers. Possibly due to the amount of grief given to them by managers whenever something goes wrong. Or, like here, by the Change Coordinators who have recently learned the joys of bureaucracy. -- John ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
