And believe it or not, there is an ISO group working on a 202X standard for COBOL.
________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> on behalf of Clark Morris <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, April 27, 2020 7:39 AM To: [email protected] <[email protected]> Subject: Latest COBOL standard is 2014 was Re: Cobol [Default] On 27 Apr 2020 00:29:21 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main [email protected] (David Crayford) wrote: >Define modern? A language is only as modern as its last standard (or >version). For example, Python is considered a modern language although >it's 30 years old. It's constantly >being updated. Python 3.6 supports static type checking! JavaScript is >the same. C++20 is being ratified, C2x is being worked on. Java 13 is >going to GA on z/OS this year! > >It's my understanding that COBOL-85 is the current standard in use on >z/OS? That's probably indicative of COBOL programmers not requiring new >language features as they don't >need them to maintain the code bases that they work on. COBOL >modernization on z/OS has mostly been back-end optimizer work which is >probably a lot more valuable to z/OS >IT managers then new language features that won't be used. If companies >want to modernize a COBOL application they integrate with Java like CICS >and IMS. The latest COBOL standard is 2014 with 2002 and 1989 extensions being predecessors. The 2014 standard supports IEEE binary floating point plus IEEE decimal floating point with all of the rounding options including round to nearest even. There also are true binary usages including binary character and USAGE BIT along with boolean operations. There is everything needed to fully work with SMf 30 records without weird coding. It would allow a relatively straight forward conversion of Assembler DSECTS to COBOL. Because it has language to support all of the IEEE fixed and floating point binary usages, IEEE and hex floating point could co-exist in the same program. I wanted USAGE BIT 50 years ago because I was dealing with bit switches on customer, product and open account files. Clark Morris > >REXX hasn't changed in almost 30 years. There's been a few updates to >TSO REXX such as EXECIO VBS support but that's about all. > >On 2020-04-25 7:03 AM, Wayne Bickerdike wrote: >> One of our guys was talking about modern languages such as C. I said what? >> >> On Sat, Apr 25, 2020 at 7:01 AM Seymour J Metz <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Well what do you know? The emperor has no clothes. We shot an innocent >>> language. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz >>> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 >>> >>> ________________________________________ >>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [[email protected]] on behalf >>> of Paul Gilmartin [[email protected]] >>> Sent: Friday, April 24, 2020 3:58 PM >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: Re: Cobol >>> >>> On Fri, 24 Apr 2020 18:26:49 +0000, Seymour J Metz wrote: >>> >>>> There are blurbs for dozens of articles; which one is relevant? I tried >>> searxhing for COBOL, but got 0 hits. >>> I suspect that was OP's desperate and futile attempt to circumvent >>> secureweb, >>> as you often do. But, I hope (posting from web interface): >>> >>> https://secure-web.cisco.com/18wMr2wQiot_mC2NJkJL7buWujrBfP9suLfEWZL4dG8gjB_Zjaj31ZgILnrnn--CfD_RooCYfsFjxvxArhRiN2V2tCmTfs8NayUQCV2ProhQ0KfRlDMDZdg2alKOSjuWwTXeK_Lci9elkht49bjva6Fj7o1W1SIr2REv9PF2NO_PK0BStoe0irBBLJRM9a_tKg3QNHj3DghbIM6_s_J2QBa8K1XWudsYnadGx1bdpDNNTapriOq_jLHjoC742AxmqQVAJ4Szwl0aLrINIHWnzPzP_p0N_kYOi4keUEoOLuWRccU_ZVES-3NC05VlKLovPbiDfx9BUbsi3Kn4nGo1sHGipsJJfPFN4ClnEGuuMjWs6LU9f2293Fm0jTt3GhayZHNNDR8prcppx857Qz_vQpR6HOUIxm-p1DAvFYE8aFU_B3Da9y60snIIWQxr9qfkI67XWmwAvbGdgFfA9cP_uBHV85oupnnYfOSco5uQPIVE/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.wired.com%2Fstory%2Fcant-file-unemployment-dont-blame-cobol%2F >>> >>> ________________________________________ >>> From: scott Ford >>> Sent: Friday, April 24, 2020 2:08 PM >>> >>> See this url ... >>> >>> >>> http://secure-web.cisco.com/1DYCAeckpzqV94PQWw8dHuuJalhW0eVroAe-0-S4pJl_FnqGfZxS4EcWK7cCAl1oA09gJJKNMcHC1Be4KK3D-KcMIEVRVBeNOw5sf7565Z6e9CTYIm43a-oit3GGWnum7LgBTpYCxV6CAhgR9TuXipYHaUjUUPtd7BICMs1zfFGQQ8NhAeXHdXvHPrGdxzaQmTRfNi8vGWGKk4fg_G75au8H3Ja9AbLwRb2m8-upI9jYdmy1ZYdzYlRF2kzlwN155wAFEug02LCkZ5Bpk3IvSuxwzwd1UUyk_5NUmIqwMFmcDxZ8SpSnwFspncJTV1bLmByZAIVczBfj-JctXDA5Ta99YBqxx1tBpdl0qN5MWPGsz1CGAQ_Is1sLoRxy9Dl_fCLgMhLDvO5L8-EsVff2IiswF1xKvwUDiAEPcV0mOxz5c915mExQuVbCTDL0KTJQEtCF5dYTiss8HJIK_dzSG8g/http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wired.com. >>> Can't File for Unemployment - Don?t Blame Cobol >>> >>> -- gil >>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> 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 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
