>>The issue of COBOL compiler messages was discussed here, and most >>agreed it would not be that helpful, since it would mostly say >>'please see the COBOL Language Reference Manual'. > >Those calling for a messages manual were asking IBM for a real manual, >not for IBM to just go through the motions. The text 'please see the >COBOL Language Reference Manual' is not a real explanation, any more >than '/* this is a comment */' is a real comment.
We are working on adding help for messages where help is not available elsewhere, but including syntax descriptions and diagrams to a message manual to explain a COBOL syntax error would mean duplicating what is in the Language Reference Manual already. This would mean more places to find the same information, and we think it is better to have one central source for such information. (98% of compiler messages are about COBOL coding) The place to look for an explanation of syntax errors is the place the define sthe syntax, isn't? For example, P/I has a compiler messages manual, but the explanations still require you to read the Language Reference Manual to solve the problem. There is really no other way to do it! For compiler messages all you need is the line of source gettin flagged, a description of what is wrong (the messae) and the Language Reference Manual. And I would also like to add that for cases where there really is not a single source of information, like run-time messages, there is a COBOL messages manual. Cheers, TomR >> COBOL is the Language of the Future! << ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
