re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013c.html#11 Article for the boss: COBOL will
outlive us all
more cobol related trivia ... other spin-offs from the science center
were companies that started offerring cp67 as commercial online service
... recent post in a.f.c
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn
COBOL will outlive us all
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013b.html#43 Article for the boss: COBOL will
outlive us all
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013b.html#45 Article for the boss: COBOL will
outlive us all
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013b.html#51 Article for the boss: COBOL will
outlive us all
In 201302201529.55146.jlturr...@centurytel.net, on 02/20/2013
at 03:29 PM, Leslie Turriff jlturr...@centurytel.net said:
All issues with level numbers and usage clauses may be quickly
resolved by looking at the COBOL Language Reference manual
(unless one has an aversion to reading it).
Or,
In
a90e503c23f97441b05ee302853b0e628645d9f...@fspas01ev010.fspa.myntet.se,
on 02/20/2013
at 09:15 AM, Thomas Berg thomas.b...@swedbank.se said:
Do you in this regard prefer, e g, that:
01 NAME1 PIC X.
88 ONE VALUE '1'.
88 ZERO VALUE '0'.
- instead be:
01 NAME1
No, unlike C, which has only pointers to functions, PL/I has procedure
variables, which may of course be based, pointed to.
A pointer, inclusive of a procedure pointer, should be just a pointer,
no different from a pointer to an aggregate or scalar. What that
pointer points to may of course have
In my previous post
= addr(s) ;
is properly
sp = addr(s) ;
John Gilmore, Ashland, MA 01721 - USA
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO
On 20 Feb 2013 13:37:40 -0800, in bit.listserv.ibm-main Leslie wrote:
On Wednesday 20 February 2013 02:15:51 Thomas Berg wrote:
It's not the features that are bad in those instances, but rather the
syntax for requesting the features; that syntax is about as far from
the purported
-Ursprungligt meddelande-
Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
För Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
Skickat: den 20 februari 2013 01:20
Till: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Ämne: Re: SV: SV: Article for the boss: COBOL will outlive us all
On Wednesday 20 February 2013 02:15:51 Thomas Berg wrote:
It's not the features that are bad in those instances, but rather the
syntax for requesting the features; that syntax is about as far from
the purported English-like character of COBOL as you can get.
I can't immediately see that
...@centurytel.net
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 2:29 PM
Subject: Re: SV: SV: SV: Article for the boss: COBOL will outlive us all
On Wednesday 20 February 2013 02:15:51 Thomas Berg wrote:
It's not the features that are bad in those instances, but rather the
syntax
Some things improved when the future of COBOL was wrested from
Codasyl, and some did not. We still have the proliferation of
distinctions among entities that ought not to be distinguished,
distinctions without substantive differences.
The three entities
pointer
procedure-pointer
program-pointer
On Wed, 20 Feb 2013 21:19:16 -0500, John Gilmore wrote:
pointer
procedure-pointer
program-pointer
are the poster children for this dubious practice. I know what the
differences among tgherm are, but if pointer had not been misconceived
in the beginning they would have been unnecessary. (There
On Monday 18 February 2013 23:20:46 Ed Gould wrote:
Most places I have worked the use of ALTER was banned in the
standards manual.
Ed
Not this place; my mentor chastised me for using structured methods
(he
didn't understand it). :-P
Leslie
In
a90e503c23f97441b05ee302853b0e628645c29...@fspas01ev010.fspa.myntet.se,
on 02/18/2013
at 02:48 PM, Thomas Berg thomas.b...@swedbank.se said:
Do you imply that these features is promoting/helping obfuscating ?
It's not the features that are bad in those instances, but rather the
syntax for
-Ursprungligt meddelande-
Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
För Leslie Turriff
Skickat: den 17 februari 2013 22:54
Till: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Ämne: Re: SV: SV: Article for the boss: COBOL will outlive us all
On Sunday 17 February 2013 12:47
In 201302151911.49741.jlturr...@centurytel.net, on 02/15/2013
at 07:11 PM, Leslie Turriff jlturr...@centurytel.net said:
Not so much a mistake as short-sightedness; before 3270s were
available, keypunches could only do upper-case
In the same time frame IBM had software that supported dual
In
a90e503c23f97441b05ee302853b0e628645c29...@fspas01ev010.fspa.myntet.se,
on 02/16/2013
at 08:53 PM, Thomas Berg thomas.b...@swedbank.se said:
COBOL is certainly not a programmers language. It's very
restricted by its syntax and functionality and is often very
clumsy to use. But that is
In
CAE1XxDH=ybtl8u6mfd29zw6kg+algi-q_cve+wgy7vyep4a...@mail.gmail.com,
on 02/17/2013
at 08:47 AM, John Gilmore jwgli...@gmail.com said:
G. H. Hardy wrote that 1) intellectual curiosity, a desire to know
how things work, 2) craftsmanship, the need to do the best job one
knows how to do, and 3)
-Ursprungligt meddelande-
Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
För Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
Skickat: den 18 februari 2013 13:07
Till: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Ämne: Re: SV: Article for the boss: COBOL will outlive us all
On Sun, 2013-02-17 at 15:54 -0600, Leslie Turriff wrote:
(I really hate the ALTER command.)
Yes, but GOTO DEPENDING (branch tables) can be quite useful for e.g.
state machines.
--
David Andrews
A. Duda Sons, Inc.
david.andr...@duda.com
On Sat, 16 Feb 2013 20:55:07 +0800, Timothy Sipples sipp...@sg.ibm.com wrote:
We have these things called PCs (and Macs) with user interfaces that
support at least two windows, and Alt-Tab (or Command-Tab) is one way among
many to toggle between them. Copy/paste seems to work, too.
Timothy,
I
GOTO DEPENDING certainly has its uses; and this usefulness can serve
as the anchor for a more general observation.
Dijkstra's original GOTO paper did not interdict them; it suggested
that thickets of GOTOs were undesirable and set out the metric that
the quality of a program is inversely related
On Sun, 2013-02-17 at 13:45 -0500, zMan wrote:
Can you do that for fields in an existing copybook?
ADDRESS OF (sender) works for anything that isn't level 66 or 88. It
even works for reference modification:
SET MY-POINTER TO ADDRESS OF CHAR-FIELD(5:1)
While you're able to do limited
On Mon, 2013-02-18 at 09:26 -0500, John Gilmore wrote:
This notion was later reified by Dijkstra's epigoni into
an interdiction: all GOTOs as bad in all circumstances.
Epigone, what a great word.
In my undergraduate days, in the immediate wake of Dijkstra's CACM
letter, acquaintances of mine
A friend of mine had something similar. He did a
PERFORM UNTIL FILE-EOF
READ ... AT END SET FILE-EOF TO TRUE.
IF NOT FILE-EOF THEN ...
the rest of the program
END-IF
END-PERFORM
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff /
On Mon, 18 Feb 2013 09:23:52 -0600, John McKown wrote:
A friend of mine had something similar. He did a
PERFORM UNTIL FILE-EOF
READ ... AT END SET FILE-EOF TO TRUE.
IF NOT FILE-EOF THEN ...
the rest of the program
END-IF
END-PERFORM
In any wisely designed language, READ is a function
Epigonoi and its descendents are good words. The insistent question
| Perché gli Epigoni dovrebbero essere inferiori ai progenitori?
has been repeated for two odd millenia now, but the pejorative sense
of these words fills a need, and I think that the best response to
this question is that
The plumbing needed to implement Paul Gilmartin's suggestion is more
complex than he perhaps implies it to be. An implementation is
straightforward in PL/I, e.g.,
declare infile file record sequential buffered ;
...
declare read_file aligned bit ; /* boolean */
...
on endfile(infile) read_infile
But Dad it takes so long to get a can down that tiny little hole.
In a message dated 2/18/2013 8:09:01 A.M. Central Standard Time,
mitchd...@gmail.com writes:
so if that comes on, you've got bigger trouble than being a quart low.
...@gmail.com
Sender: IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 07:36:02
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Reply-To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Article for the boss: COBOL will outlive us all
Pity Michael
On 18 Feb 2013 08:30:24 -0800, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote:
The plumbing needed to implement Paul Gilmartin's suggestion is more
complex than he perhaps implies it to be. An implementation is
straightforward in PL/I, e.g.,
declare infile file record sequential buffered ;
...
declare
On Monday 18 February 2013 05:16:45 Thomas Berg wrote:
(I really hate the ALTER command.)
Fortunately I haven't seen this the last +20 years or so. Anf if I had I
would have strangled the programmer... :)
I had one at my last application programming job last year. (They
never
On Monday 18 February 2013 15:57:12 Clark Morris wrote:
On 18 Feb 2013 08:30:24 -0800, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote:
The plumbing needed to implement Paul Gilmartin's suggestion is more
complex than he perhaps implies it to be. An implementation is
straightforward in PL/I, e.g.,
Most places I have worked the use of ALTER was banned in the
standards manual.
Ed
On Feb 18, 2013, at 7:45 PM, Leslie Turriff wrote:
On Monday 18 February 2013 05:16:45 Thomas Berg wrote:
(I really hate the ALTER command.)
Fortunately I haven't seen this the last +20 years or so. Anf if
Same goes for COBOL, PL/1 and even C.
My Managers tell me, that everything has to be converted to Java,
because - for example - PL/1 people are far too expensive.
They don't count, that the new applications written in Java have a
inferior quality compared with the existing PL/1-ASS-C application
Ed Gould wrote:
begin extract
I suspect COBOL programmers want to lean how to basically code COBOL
programs and how to debug them PERIOD
/end extract
I instead suspect that EG has described what the managers of these
COBOL programmers want them to learn.
G. H. Hardy wrote that 1) intellectual
John,
snip
G. H. Hardy wrote that 1) intellectual curiosity, a desire to know how
things work, 2) craftsmanship, the need to do the best job one knows
how to do, and 3) a desire for recognition, even fame, are sine quibus
non for success at any intellectual task.
/snip
This is exactly how i
This was handed down from my father to, craftsmanship, quality, understanding ..
Scott ford
www.identityforge.com
Tell me and I'll forget; show me and I may remember; involve me and I'll
understand. - Chinese Proverb
On Feb 17, 2013, at 9:15 AM, Scott Ford scott_j_f...@yahoo.com wrote:
John:
Well we are both right. COBOL types are essentially slaves. As we all
know there are two (maybe three) kind of slaves.
1. Just coders. 2. Coders with a want to learn 3. Coders who have an
imagination.
Ed
On Feb 17, 2013, at 7:47 AM, John Gilmore wrote:
Ed Gould wrote:
begin
Ed and John,
Sometimes because of circumstances programmers get locked into their positions
because no
opportunities inside the Company or because they are too good at what they do.
I was in operations and that happened.
Scott ford
www.identityforge.com
Tell me and I'll forget; show me and
On Sat, 2013-02-16 at 16:14 -0500, zMan wrote:
If this was supposed to be asking What is it that's awkward to do in
COBOL?, try calculating the offset between two data elements.
It's possible. Not pretty, but IMO beats resorting to an assembly
language subroutine.
01 POINTER-ARITHMETIC.
Can you do that for fields in an existing copybook?
On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 11:36 AM, David Andrews d...@lists.duda.com wrote:
On Sat, 2013-02-16 at 16:14 -0500, zMan wrote:
If this was supposed to be asking What is it that's awkward to do in
COBOL?, try calculating the offset between two
: COBOL will outlive us all
Tony H wrote
| Now back to our regular COBOL, uh, programming.
thus alluding to how many of us view of the language.
Over a now long career I never took COBOL seriously. I was aware of
it, and I even learned to write it by helping COBOL programmers
februari 2013 21:26
Till: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Ämne: Re: SV: Article for the boss: COBOL will outlive us all
Thomas,
I don't follow, writing in several languages , what awkward to do in
cobol, supervisory stuff yes for sure.
Scott ford
www.identityforge.com
Tell me and I'll forget
Thomas Berg's notion that COBOL is hard to obfuscate is less true than
it once was.
REDEFINES has always had its obfuscatory uses; but the availability of
pointers now makes data-type punning easy in a language that has no
tradition of its appropriate, in-good-taste use.
Let me repeat myself.
The pointer addition to Cobol, you use ver effectively. I have queried the CVT
...for various fields successfully.
Scott ford
www.identityforge.com
Tell me and I'll forget; show me and I may remember; involve me and I'll
understand. - Chinese Proverb
On Feb 17, 2013, at 2:45 PM, John Gilmore
The pointer addition to Cobol, you use very effectively. I have queried the CVT
...for various fields successfully.
Scott ford
www.identityforge.com
Tell me and I'll forget; show me and I may remember; involve me and I'll
understand. - Chinese Proverb
On Feb 17, 2013, at 3:39 PM, Scott Ford
Additionally, String and Unstring are very powerful verbs in Cobol. Good
parsing is a essential when looking at data, some akin to Rexx would be great
in Cobol...C you can use tokens
Scott ford
www.identityforge.com
Tell me and I'll forget; show me and I may remember; involve me and I'll
On Sunday 17 February 2013 12:47:16 Thomas Berg wrote:
Some suggestions:
* GO TO's from in the middle of one SECTION into the middle of another.
And then GO TO back again depending on a switch... * Programs with nested
PERFORMS (*only* PERFORMS!) in maybe 7 levels ending in a CALL of another
for the boss: COBOL will outlive us all
Thomas,
I don't follow, writing in several languages , what awkward to do in
cobol, supervisory stuff yes for sure.
Scott ford
www.identityforge.com
Tell me and I'll forget; show me and I may remember; involve me and
I'll understand. - Chinese
On 17 Feb 2013 14:01:41 -0800, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote:
On Sunday 17 February 2013 12:47:16 Thomas Berg wrote:
Some suggestions:
* GO TO's from in the middle of one SECTION into the middle of another.
And then GO TO back again depending on a switch... * Programs with nested
On 16 Feb 2013 13:15:06 -0800, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote:
On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Scott Ford scott_j_f...@yahoo.com wrote:
Thomas,
I don't follow, writing in several languages , what awkward to do in
cobol, supervisory stuff yes for sure.
Yoda? Is that you? :-)
If this
On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 8:26 PM, Clark Morris cfmpub...@ns.sympatico.cawrote:
Read the current manuals. As someone who has manipulated the SMF 30
records using COBOL WITHOUT resorting to Assembler, I can state that
for much problem program state work, COBOL is quite adequate. I have
also
On 16 February 2013 07:55, Timothy Sipples sipp...@sg.ibm.com wrote:
For comparison -- and far worse when you think about it -- most automobiles
have at least two ways of checking the oil level. One way is a binary
readout, located on the dashboard. If the light is not illuminated, you
have
Tony H wrote
| Now back to our regular COBOL, uh, programming.
thus alluding to how many of us view of the language.
Over a now long career I never took COBOL seriously. I was aware of
it, and I even learned to write it by helping COBOL programmers with
their problems. It is a verbose but
On 2/16/2013 12:25 PM, John Gilmore wrote:
Tony H wrote
| Now back to our regular COBOL, uh, programming.
thus alluding to how many of us view of the language.
Over a now long career I never took COBOL seriously. I was aware of
it, and I even learned to write it by helping COBOL programmers
-Ursprungligt meddelande-
Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
För John Gilmore
Skickat: den 16 februari 2013 20:25
Till: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Ämne: Re: Article for the boss: COBOL will outlive us all
Tony H wrote
| Now back to our regular
Steve,
I too have taught courses in 'modern COBOL' in client shops. I have
stopped doing so. What I accomplished was to turn the brightest
younger programmers into disaffected employees because their managers
were unsupportive. Some of them were, I suspect, already disaffected;
but I was
Berg thomas.b...@swedbank.se wrote:
-Ursprungligt meddelande-
Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
För John Gilmore
Skickat: den 16 februari 2013 20:25
Till: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Ämne: Re: Article for the boss: COBOL will outlive us all
Tony H
On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Scott Ford scott_j_f...@yahoo.com wrote:
Thomas,
I don't follow, writing in several languages , what awkward to do in
cobol, supervisory stuff yes for sure.
Yoda? Is that you? :-)
If this was supposed to be asking What is it that's awkward to do in
COBOL?,
Ba zing ...ok zMan, I agree I write Assembler, C ...on the MF ..I agree
..multi-tasking is a bit rough
Scott ford
www.identityforge.com
Tell me and I'll forget; show me and I may remember; involve me and I'll
understand. - Chinese Proverb
On Feb 16, 2013, at 4:14 PM, zMan
zMan,
But there are manglers , aka managers who say Assembler ode is hard to maintain
because of te skillset required.
Scott ford
www.identityforge.com
Tell me and I'll forget; show me and I may remember; involve me and I'll
understand. - Chinese Proverb
On Feb 16, 2013, at 4:35 PM, Scott
On Feb 16, 2013, at 2:15 PM, John Gilmore wrote:
---
SNIP--
The culture of most COBOL shops is so complacent that disruptive
technology is very hard to teach in them. It is not, I am sure,
impossible; but it is almost certainly
On Fri, 15 Feb 2013 14:24:35 +0800, Timothy Sipples sipp...@sg.ibm.com wrote:
That said, if the command line is readily accessible from the graphical/Web
interface, I don't see the problem.
That's the rub, there isn't a readily accessable command line available, a
real 5250 emulator session
the file. Been bit more than once. :-)
Lloyd
- Original Message
From: Phil Smith p...@voltage.com
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Sent: Wed, February 13, 2013 5:17:35 PM
Subject: Re: Article for the boss: COBOL will outlive us all
(Oddly, the one quasi-counter-argument is CMS, where you have
: COBOL will
outlive us all
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013b.html#45 Article for the boss: COBOL will
outlive us all
note that some of the people from 7094/CTSS went to the science center
on the 4th flr and did virtual machines ... initially cp40/cms on a
360/40 that had special hardware changes
On Wednesday 13 February 2013 16:17:28 Phil Smith wrote:
R.S. wrote:
BTW: My argument against Unix behavior: I cannot distinguish MyFiLE and
MYfiLe during phone call. Even spelling is simpler for M-y-f-I-L-e than
for Upper M - Upper Y
Indeed. I'd put it more strongly: Case sensitivity
will
outlive us all
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013b.html#45 Article for the boss: COBOL will
outlive us all
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013b.html#51 Article for the boss: COBOL will
outlive us all
7094/ctss, cp40/cms, cp67/cms, etc were online, interactive system with
1052s, 2741s terminals
On Wed, 13 Feb 2013 10:44:26 -0600, Dana Mitchell wrote:
I've been reading the same theory as it applied to us Systems Programmers the
last few years. Mass retirement making the remaining sysprogs highly sought
after and compensated. Well, I've personally seen lots of retirements, but
due
/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker
From: John McKown john.archie.mck...@gmail.com
To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu,
Date: 02/13/2013 09:10 PM
Subject:Re: Article for the boss: COBOL will outlive us all
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu
Don't
On Wed, 13 Feb 2013 17:10:06 -0600, Ed Gould edgould1...@comcast.net wrote:
Dana:
About 15 years ago I was in a IBM class (all sysprogs). The
instructor came out and said it is IBM's hope to get rid of system
programmers. That tells you a lot from IBM's POV. I have distrusted
IBM ever
On Feb 14, 2013, at 2:11 AM, Martin Packer martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com wrote:
Not saying you're wrong but OSX is based on Unix.
OS X is Unix, but the HFS+ file system it uses comes from the old Mac OS and is
case insensitive but case preserving.
--
Curtis Pew (c@its.utexas.edu)
ITS Systems
In b51dbe2e-0434-4f01-997d-94896547f...@yahoo.com, on 02/13/2013
at 04:07 PM, Scott Ford scott_j_f...@yahoo.com said:
Not following your thought, folders or file names can be any
combination of upper or lower case...at least on Windoze 7
Yes, but can a single directory contain two distinct
In 511c0f1a.4030...@bremultibank.com.pl, on 02/13/2013
at 11:09 PM, R.S. r.skoru...@bremultibank.com.pl said:
Windows behavior is older than ...Windows. Reaaly - Windows
followed after OS/2.
No.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
Atid/2
martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com (Martin Packer) writes:
Not saying you're wrong but OSX is based on Unix.
even some IBM content ... in the early 80s, IBM was getting back into
support for educational institutions (some gov. restrictions expiring)
including forming ACIS starting out with $300M for univ.
Dana,
Thank you, my thoughts exactly. When I learned VM/SP and CMS had a manager make
me learn the basic commands first then write Execs.
Scott ford
www.identityforge.com
Tell me and I'll forget; show me and I may remember; involve me and I'll
understand. - Chinese Proverb
On Feb 14, 2013,
Tom Marchant wrote, re:
On an i system (don't get me started on that choice of a name for an
operating system)
Ok, I'll stir the pot. What's wrong with iSeries or System i?
Nothing, except that those names are long dead. The System Formerly Known As
AS/400 is called IBM i nowadays -
On Thu, 14 Feb 2013 11:07:49 -0500, Phil Smith III li...@akphs.com wrote:
a triumph of bad naming in the Internet era
.phsiii
Phil,
Well said!! Exactly
Dana
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access
: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of John McKown
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2013 9:02 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: [IBM-MAIN] Article for the boss: COBOL will outlive us all
http://www.itworld.com/career/341879/cobol-will-outlive-us
From: Paul Gilmartin paulgboul...@aim.com
Date: 02/14/2013 09:23 AM
On Thu, 14 Feb 2013 13:26:02 +, Pew, Curtis G wrote:
On Feb 14, 2013, at 2:11 AM, Martin Packer martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com
wrote:
Not saying you're wrong but OSX is based on Unix.
OS X is Unix, but the HFS+ file
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Article for the boss: COBOL will outlive us all
On Wednesday 13 February 2013 11:26:03 Ken Porowski wrote:
One of the comments on that article left this link
http://mainframes.wikidot.com/ which claims to be a partial listing
of
all Mainframe
Don,
I will work on adding a field for that.
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 12:47 PM, Don Williams donb...@gmail.com wrote:
It would be interesting to have a list shops by operating systems:
1. z/OS
2. z/VM
3. z/VSE
4. z/TPF
5. z/Linux
etc.
Don
--
Ian
http://www.cicsworld.com
Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
On Behalf Of Joel C. Ewing
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2013 1:16 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Article for the boss: COBOL will outlive us all
The referenced wikidot URL calling itself a List
donb...@gmail.com (Don Williams) writes:
18,000 companies w/MFs world-wide? Seems low.
re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2013b.html#43 Article for the boss: COBOL will
outlive us all
estimate that there are 10k world-wide at 4k to 5k customers
http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2010
Dana Mitchell writes:
The trouble is that not *all* functions can be performed from a 5250
session. Conversely not all functions can be executed from any one of
the gui's either. This creates a dog's dinner of interfaces required
to perform all the duties needed to be an admin on an i system.
http://www.itworld.com/career/341879/cobol-will-outlive-us-all
quote
...
The reason that I’m telling you about COBOL is that I predict that over the
next few years, new COBOL programmers are going to be in high demand and
very possibly paid a premium for their efforts. Generally speaking, the
John,
Still a lot of financial applications in CICS and IMS and DB2 are in Cobol. I
can see this happening easily.
Scott ford
www.identityforge.com
Tell me and I'll forget; show me and I may remember; involve me and I'll
understand. - Chinese Proverb
On Feb 13, 2013, at 9:01 AM, John McKown
Me too. But try to convince the Windows-oriented manage-by-magazine types.
Well, this is the article for them.
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 8:31 AM, Scott Ford scott_j_f...@yahoo.com wrote:
John,
Still a lot of financial applications in CICS and IMS and DB2 are in
Cobol. I can see this happening
John,
Geez, everything is written in Java ?
Scott ford
www.identityforge.com
Tell me and I'll forget; show me and I may remember; involve me and I'll
understand. - Chinese Proverb
On Feb 13, 2013, at 9:37 AM, John McKown john.archie.mck...@gmail.com wrote:
Me too. But try to convince the
Not in our shop. We're .NET mainly. On the Windows side, that is. On the
z/OS side, we are almost pure COBOL. At one time, a set of ex-managers were
really gung-ho on Java and Linux. But they were replaced by the usual
Windows lovers.
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 9:09 AM, Scott Ford
because that is what they was taught...and live in a BOX ... with blinders
on
From: John McKown john.archie.mck...@gmail.com
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date: 02/13/2013 09:27 AM
Subject:Re: Article for the boss: COBOL will outlive us all
Sent by:IBM Mainframe
D'Angelo
-- Original Message --
From: Ron Wells ron.we...@slfs.com
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Article for the boss: COBOL will outlive us all
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 09:29:57 -0600
because that is what they was taught...and live in a BOX ... with blinders
Many things, even popular things, start out as just one person's opinion.
In our case, some of what the author said is exactly why we are still
running z/OS with COBOL. The minimal cost to convert and test our z/OS
based systems onto an equivalent Windows environment cost far too much
and entailed
I've been reading the same theory as it applied to us Systems Programmers the
last few years. Mass retirement making the remaining sysprogs highly sought
after and compensated. Well, I've personally seen lots of retirements, but
due to the combination of outsourcing, business acquisitions,
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: [IBM-MAIN] Article for the boss: COBOL will outlive us all
http://www.itworld.com/career/341879/cobol-will-outlive-us-all
quote
...
The reason that I'm telling you about COBOL is that I predict that over
the next few years, new COBOL programmers are going
On Wednesday 13 February 2013 11:26:03 Ken Porowski wrote:
One of the comments on that article left this link
http://mainframes.wikidot.com/ which claims to be a partial listing of
all Mainframe shops in the world.
Ken
I sure wish there was a similar list of companies that run z/VM.
On Wed, 13 Feb 2013 12:26:03 -0500, Ken Porowski wrote:
... a partial listing of all ...
[sic]
-- gil
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message:
to be a partial listing of
all Mainframe shops in the world.
Ken
...
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of John McKown
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2013 9:02 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: [IBM-MAIN] Article for the boss: COBOL will outlive us all
.
--
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of John McKown
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2013 9:02 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: [IBM-MAIN] Article for the boss: COBOL will outlive us all
http
: Wednesday, February 13, 2013 1:22 PM
Subject: Re: Article for the boss: COBOL will outlive us all
It is *very* partial list. There are about 25 mainframe shops in israel,
only one is listed.
ITschak
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 7:26 PM, Ken Porowski ken.porow...@cit.com
wrote:
One of the comments
1 - 100 of 118 matches
Mail list logo
