-------- Original Message --------
Subject: re: Enterprise COBOL v5.1 and RDz v9.x
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2014 11:59:45 -0700
From: Tom Ross <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: Enterprise COBOL v5.1 and RDz v9.x
>I learned via PMR that Rational Developer for System z ("RDz")
v9.x ("latest & greatest") does not "officially" support
>Enterprise COBOL v5.1.
<SNIPPAGE>
Ooops, sorry about that too. RDz development might not know that
we in COBOL are planning to add support to COBOL …
<SNIPPAGE>
-----
Perhaps IBM needs to get the different groups w/in IBM that use
the COBOL compiler to be a bit more connected to COBOL development?
A migration was proposed to translate (using an IBM utility) an
ISV’s code to COBOL (~NOV2013). The problem is, the group that
has the translation tool had NO idea about COBOL 5.1, and
apparently had no plans to make their tool COBOL 5.1 friendly (as
in, NOT using new reserved words and the like).
Why would a customer want to xlate to COBOL 4.2, and then have to
migrate all of that to COBOL 5 in less than 2 years?
The left hands need to know that a right hand exists and what it
is doing [Yes, I meant left hands – plural.]
This reminds me of the J4 (?) discussion of going to "long"
statements (LRECL>100) and dropping sequence numbers. The COBOL
development group had NO idea that CPCS (Check Processing Control
System) existed and depended on sequence numbers so that a
customer and IBM could keep source level changes properly
synchronized. [Yes, I know that the LRECL=80 format was kept, the
point was that COBOL sequence numbers may be needed, regardless
of the new GUI IDEs being developed.]
Regards,
Steve Thompson
[Opinions expressed by this poster may not reflect those of
poster's employer.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
