On Sat, 20 Oct 2012 09:19:24 -0400, John Gilmore wrote: >COBOL's 88-level machinery is an artefact of lacunæ elsewhere. In >particular, boolean variables, while they have made their way into the >COBOL standard, have not yet made it into IBM COBOL implementations. > IBM's adherence to standards is frequently moderated by an NIH attitude. IBM fails to understand that nowadays it is a tail (in a couple senses) that can no longer wag the dog.
On Sat, 20 Oct 2012 07:32:24 -0500, Mike Schwab wrote: >Most levels are for breaking an area of memory into various fields. >Not an 88 level. > Ah! I quite misunderstood, taking '88' to be a cardinal number (not Jesuit). >DATA DIVISION. >... >10 FIELD-NAME PIC X(5). > 88 FIELD-NAME-TRUE VALUE 'TRUE ';. > 88 FIELD-NAME-FALSE VALUE 'FALSE'. >... >PROCEDURE DIVISION >... >IF FIELD-NAME-TRUE THEN > >is equivalent to >IF FIELD-NAME = 'TRUE ' THEN > So it's almost but not quite entirely unlike the use of "enum" in other languages. But still: >On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 6:18 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote: >>> >> ... How does this (help to) provide the >> function of strcasecmp()? (Perhaps a schematic example?) Thanks, gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
