I wonder, exactly, how code is "corrupted". Does it start fading away as it ages? :-(
>________________________________ > From: scott <[email protected]> >To: [email protected] >Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 8:48 PM >Subject: Re: Blame the COBOL, how cliché > > >The problem isn't the code, it's 1) The documentation for it - >explaining how it was built, what was in it, and how it works - >disappeared long ago. 2) Significant parts of the code have been >“corrupted.” 3) “As time passes, the pool of COBOL expertise dwindles.” >4) The political will and military bureaucracy is not there. > >As you all probably have come to the conclusion as I did there has been >a lackadaisical attitude for decades and will continue. Sure they tried >to update the systems but apparently haven't gotten very far and matters >have only gotten worse. > >Yeah, blame COBOL. It's a lazy way out instead of admitting personnel >failures. > >Scott > > >On 07/24/2013 04:34 PM, Phil Smith III wrote: >> http://preview.reuters.com/2013/7/9/wounded-in-battle-stiffed-by-the-pentago >> n >> >> >> >> So the reason the payroll system is broken is because COBOL is “old”? >> Sheesh. That’s really weak… >> >> >> >> Oy, and they tried PeopleSoft as a replacement… >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, >> send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN >> > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- >For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, >send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
