Backward compatibility has its uses. I know of a z/OS 1.12 shop where a very large AMODE(24) COBOL load module that makes critical use of BDAM and was last compiled and linked in 1992 is executed daily.
I think not, but there are others who judge that this is desirable and appropriate. Opinions differ, and everyone is entitled to his own. No one is, however, entitled to his own facts; and what is indisputable here is that the source program for that long-lived COBOL application could not be processed successfully by a currently supported COBOL compiler without first making major changes in it. This is certainly appropriate. Backward compatibility defined in such a way that it precludes the implementation of better new facilities that are inconsistent with old ones is an obscene notion. Its implicit premise is that we get things right the first time out of the box, and we do not. John Gilmore, Ashland, MA 01721 - USA ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
