Re: Opinions/experience on sharing catalogs outside plex

[Brian Westerman]

Sharing catalogs outside of the sysplex (i.e. with connected LPARs that just 
"happen" to not be in the sysplex), is perfectly fine as long as you remember 
that it's impossible for them to share the information stored in the CF's, so 
if you cache the catalog(s) in the CF you will need to stop doing that.  
Otherwise there is no real danger involved and in fact it is done all the time.

I can't stress enough though that you can't treat it like all of your plexed 
systems are able to cache it in the CF and the "other" LPAR will magically get 
that cache somehow, because it will not.

Now, assuming you don't mind having a slight bit more overhead by not caching 
the catalog(s) in the CF, you should have no problems.  

Also, it's normally a really good idea if you are going to share your catalogs, 
that you share them all.  Unless you are very regimented (and careful), because 
you could end up with some issues (data management wise), where some datasets 
are cataloged and some are not, this can be a real issue with SMS dataset and 
also when you run your tape management processes, so unless you are careful, 
sharing just a subset is pretty dreadful.  

So, either share them all, or don't share any.  As long as you aren't caching 
them (in the CF structures) you will be fine.  People do this all the time 
where they have a sysplex and a test or sandbox system or they have LPARs that 
they are trying to combine.  It's just like running several LPARs on the same 
BOX that are not SYSPLEXed, it works fine.  Just remember that the DASD needs 
to be shared and there will be reserves, (but they are catalogs so it's minor 
and not many).

It's also a good idea when sharing DASD at all to have GRS involved (or MIM).  

Brian

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: FW: COBOL NJ

[Jack J. Woehr]

On 4/8/20 7:58 PM, Bob Bridges wrote:

(Regarding that tagline:)  YES!!  "Science" is only superficially an activity, 
and even more superficially a job; much more important it's a philosophy, a way of 
approaching the discovery of knowledge.  By that definition some scientists aren't, and 
some non-scientists are.



And it's salutary to remember that it was uttered by the man dubbed 
"BHA" by the engineers at Apple Computer :)



--
Jack J. Woehr # Science is more than a body of knowledge. It's a way of
www.well.com/~jax # thinking, a way of skeptically interrogating the universe
www.softwoehr.com # with a fine understanding of human fallibility. - Carl Sagan

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: FW: COBOL NJ

[Bob Bridges]

(Regarding that tagline:)  YES!!  "Science" is only superficially an activity, 
and even more superficially a job; much more important it's a philosophy, a way 
of approaching the discovery of knowledge.  By that definition some scientists 
aren't, and some non-scientists are.

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* Men are qualified for civil liberty, in exact proportion to their 
disposition to put moral chains upon their own appetitesSociety cannot 
exist unless a controling power upon will and appetite be placed somewhere, and 
the less of it there is within, the more there must be without.  It is ordained 
in the eternal constitution of things, that men of intemperate minds cannot be 
free.  Their passions forge their fetters.  -Edmund Burke, 1791 */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Jack J. Woehr
Sent: Wednesday, April 8, 2020 21:12

Jack J. Woehr # Science is more than a body of knowledge. It's a way of
www.well.com/~jax # thinking, a way of skeptically interrogating the universe
www.softwoehr.com # with a fine understanding of human fallibility. - Carl Sagan

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - Weirdware

[David Crayford]

As Martin previously mentioned some languages implement proper tail 
calls so they effectively turn recursion into iteration 
https://www.lua.org/pil/6.3.html.


This is a great optimization as recursion is often the most elegant 
method to implement many data structures and algorithms (quicksort, 
binary trees etc).



On 2020-04-09 12:40 AM, Frank Swarbrick wrote:

Yes, very verbose.
And yes, recursion is possible, but you must specify "IS RECURSIVE" on the 
PROGRAM-ID.  Not sure what having nested programs has to do with that, though.


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of David 
Crayford 
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 7:44 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - 
Weirdware

Wow, and some people criticize Java for being verbose!

So using nested programs one can implement recursion in COBOL which you
couldn't do before without using a table stack.

On 2020-04-08 5:14 AM, Frank Swarbrick wrote:

Nested subroutines.

Small example:

   ID DIVISION.
   PROGRAM-NAME. MAINPROG.
   [...]
   PROCEDURE DIVISION.
   CALL 'NESTED-PROGRAM-1'
   GOBACK.

   ID DIVISION.
   PROGRAM-ID. NESTED-PROGRAM-1.
   DATA DIVISION.
   WORKING-STORAGE SECTION.
   01  LOCAL-VAR-1 PIC X.
   [...]
   PROCEDURE DIVISION.
   DISPLAY 'IN NESTED-PROGRAM-1'
   GOBACK.

   END PROGRAM NESTED-PROGRAM-1.

   END PROGRAM MAINPROG.


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of David 
Spiegel 
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 2:58 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - 
Weirdware

Hi Frank,
Thank you for that information.
(All the COBOL I support(ed) didn't contain these and neither did my
university courses in the '70s.)

If I wanted to look them up, which keyword(s) would I use?

Thanks and regards,
David

On 2020-04-07 15:49, Frank Swarbrick wrote:

Internal subroutines and local variables have been supported since COBOL 1985 
(VS COBOL II era).
They're not ideal, but they do exist.


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of David 
Spiegel 
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 12:58 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - 
Weirdware

How about no internal subroutines with local variables?

On 2020-04-07 14:47, Bob Bridges wrote:

I used to bad-mouth COBOL, and I still prefer languages that are less wordy.  But I came 
somewhat reluctantly to see that it has its strengths.  The one I think most important is 
that it encourages even novice programmers to organize their logic in what we used to 
call a "top-down" manner:  This paragraph accomplish a certain task by 
executing paragraphs one through three, then two more, and this subparagraph executes 
subsubparagraphs, and so on.  Forms good habits, I think.

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* My life is in the hands of any fool who can make me lose my temper.  
-driving motto */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of scott Ford
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 12:55

I learned Assembler first and then Cobol and then some PL/1.  I always felt 
each language had its strengths and weaknesses and all were like tools in a 
toolbox.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access 

Re: Opinions/experience on sharing catalogs outside plex

[Anthony Thompson]

Sounds like a bad idea to me. You can't guarantee the integrity of the user 
catalogues.

Can you set up the external systems as NJE nodes and get them to submit jobs to 
your sysplex instead?

Ant.  

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of Rob 
Schramm
Sent: Thursday, 9 April 2020 9:41 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Opinions/experience on sharing catalogs outside plex

I am considering sharing some usercats outside of a sysplex.  What I can find 
is that sysiggv2 must be kept as a reserve to do so.

Looking for others that have had to do this.

One question I had was, what happens on a ispf 3.4 when the data set is part of 
the catalog but exists in another system?  Ief238d?

Thanks,

Rob Schramm

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Some COBOL Links

[Bob Bridges]

Am I being unnecessarily cynical to wonder about the risk of taking on new 
COBOL programmers who "volunteer" to help the state remediate applications that 
hand out money?

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* Law #36 of combat operations:  Radar tends to fail at night and in bad 
weather, and especially during both. */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Matt Hogstrom
Sent: Wednesday, April 8, 2020 19:52

I agree, a systematic assessment of the issues should pre-empt acquiring a 
programming army, unless its really the programs that need to be changed.  
Their issues could be ranging across a whole swath of issues.  their challenges 
do sound like they would be a bit of fun to understand and remediate as needed.

> --- On Apr 8, 2020, at 7:25 PM, Reg Harbeck  wrote:
> While I still think the governor of New Jersey probably should be looking at
> a capacity increase before tempting Brook's Law by adding programmers to a
> project that is already behind the eight ball,

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: FW: COBOL NJ

[Jack J. Woehr]

On 4/8/20 3:58 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:


 From another list:
 https://forms.business.nj.gov/tech/


Thanks, Paul

--
Jack J. Woehr # Science is more than a body of knowledge. It's a way of
www.well.com/~jax # thinking, a way of skeptically interrogating the universe
www.softwoehr.com # with a fine understanding of human fallibility. - Carl Sagan

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: regarding the 'shortage of mainframe talent'

[Bob Bridges]

All my work is part-time, now.  But I can't tell you how to start, because I 
slid into it sort of accidentally.  The consulting company I worked for had me 
working a full-time RBAC project (more than full-time, actually) when another 
client wanted someone to handle security functions just 30 hr/mo; I was 
skeptical that I would be able to spare even that much time, but it worked out 
fine, and six months later the RBAC project was winding down anyway.  By the 
time the RBAC client sent me home, my employers had found me another client who 
wanted the same sort of thing, a security jock whom they could hire to handle 
the occasional issue without employing me full-time.

It was only at that point that I realized I was now committed to remote 
part-time work.  If I try to take on an on-site client, and suddenly one of my 
previous clients has an emergency that they need me to handle, what am I going 
to do?  Walk out of the full-time client's building, go back to my hotel, and 
return to work afterward?  That wouldn't go over very well.  So now I have two 
or three clients at a time, all remote, and mostly I work much less than 40 
hr/wk (but sometimes more).

I've found that it suits me well.  I'm nearing retirement age with no intention 
of retiring - financially speaking I don't ~need~ to work full-time - and I'm 
about to start collecting social-security benefits on top of it, if the country 
doesn't go bankrupt before then.  Recruiters call me and I tell them I can 
consider only part-time; most of them go away at that point, but every so often 
one says "I think my client would consider that".

But breaking into it, the start-up period...I don't know how to advise you.  
God's blessed me, and mostly it happened while I wasn’t looking.  Still, you 
say you're "semi-retired" so I take it you don't need the income, at least not 
urgently; maybe it's just a matter of waiting for the right recruiters to come 
along, or for you to happen to call the right ones yourself.  You may already 
know how much depends on ~timing~.

Ageism?  I'm willing to believe it's real, but I haven't noticed it.  But then 
I'm only 65.  Maybe in another ten years.

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* A delay is better than a disaster.  -Found taped to a departed IS manager's 
keyboard */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Gord Tomlin
Sent: Wednesday, April 8, 2020 18:20

This may sound facetious, but it's not meant to be. It all depends on 
what you want out of the part time project(s).

If your objective is to do something interesting and mind-stimulating in 
your newly enlarged spare time, then there are massive number of open 
source projects you could contribute to. There's a very good chance that 
some such projects line up well with your outside interests.

On the other hand, if your objective is to get paid for your part-time 
efforts, things are much tougher. Most employers want to see a full-time 
commitment from their employees, and ageism is real.

--- On 2020-04-08 16:29, Stan Saraczewski wrote:
> Question - how does a semi retired person secure part time projects ? There
> is a difficulty getting past the 40 hour a week retirement...

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - Weirdware

[Bob Bridges]

I occasionally have to write something recursive.  Every single time, I have to 
stare at the screen for quite a while to figure out how to do it.  For some 
reason the part where I decide where to enter the recursion, and where in the 
loop to exit it, cause me no end of uncertainty.  I don't know why it's so 
difficult for me.  I assume it's not everyone who has that problem.

But sometimes nothing but recursion will do.

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* Dad and Mom can share the driving chores, as follows: Dad will start out at 
the wheel, then Mom will take over as soon as Dad dies. Because Dad is a male, 
and males are very reluctant to relinquish control over vehicles. The real 
reason the captain of the Titanic went down with the ship was his fear that, at 
the last minute, his wife would take the helm.  -Dave Barry on family 
vacations, 2003 */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Wayne Bickerdike
Sent: Wednesday, April 8, 2020 15:42

My first and only recursive program was written in PL1. To avoid a GOTO.
Wrong! S80A abend. Would probably work today with copious amounts of
memory.

--- On Thu, Apr 9, 2020, 02:40 Frank Swarbrick wrote:
> And yes, recursion is possible, but you must specify "IS RECURSIVE" on the
> PROGRAM-ID.  Not sure what having nested programs has to do with that,
> though.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Opinions/experience on sharing catalogs outside plex

[Rob Schramm]

I am considering sharing some usercats outside of a sysplex.  What I can
find is that sysiggv2 must be kept as a reserve to do so.

Looking for others that have had to do this.

One question I had was, what happens on a ispf 3.4 when the data set is
part of the catalog but exists in another system?  Ief238d?

Thanks,

Rob Schramm

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Some COBOL Links

[Matt Hogstrom]

I agree, a systematic assessment of the issues should pre-empt acquiring a 
programming army, unless its really the programs that need to be changed.  
Their issues could be ranging across a whole swath of issues.  their challenges 
do sound like they would be a bit of fun to understand and remediate as needed.

Matt Hogstrom
m...@hogstrom.org
PGP Key: 0x90ECB270
Facebook   LinkedIn 
  Twitter 

“It may be cognitive, but, it ain’t intuitive."
— Hogstrom

> On Apr 8, 2020, at 7:25 PM, Reg Harbeck  wrote:
> 
> While I still think the governor of New Jersey probably should be looking at
> a capacity increase before tempting Brook's Law by adding programmers to a
> project that is already behind the eight ball,


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Some COBOL Links

[Reg Harbeck]

While I still think the governor of New Jersey probably should be looking at
a capacity increase before tempting Brook's Law by adding programmers to a
project that is already behind the eight ball, since we all have the
opportunity to defend COBOL to people who are temporarily listening, here
are some links that may be of use:

 

https://www.planetmainframe.com/2019/08/cobol-still-the-best-for-new-high-vo
lume-applications-after-all-these-years/ 

 

https://ibmsystemsmag.com/IBM-Z/05/2019/cobol-turns-60 

 

https://ibmsystemsmag.com/Trends/09/2019/captain-cobol-tom-ross 

 

https://ibmsystemsmag.com/Trends/11/2019/michelle-yeager-hayley-owens-cobol

 

https://ibmsystemsmag.com/Trends/10/2019/ray-mullins

 

https://community.ibm.com/community/user/ibmz-and-linuxone/blogs/destination
-z1/2019/12/23/genealogy-of-cobol-and-hlasm

 

Reg Harbeck

403-605-7986

 


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: regarding the 'shortage of mainframe talent'

[Gord Tomlin]

On 2020-04-08 16:29, Stan Saraczewski wrote:

Question - how does a semi retired person secure part time projects ? There
is a difficulty getting past the 40 hour a week retirement...


This may sound facetious, but it's not meant to be. It all depends on 
what you want out of the part time project(s).


If your objective is to do something interesting and mind-stimulating in 
your newly enlarged spare time, then there are massive number of open 
source projects you could contribute to. There's a very good chance that 
some such projects line up well with your outside interests.


On the other hand, if your objective is to get paid for your part-time 
efforts, things are much tougher. Most employers want to see a full-time 
commitment from their employees, and ageism is real.


--

Regards, Gord Tomlin
Action Software International
(a division of Mazda Computer Corporation)
Tel: (905) 470-7113, Fax: (905) 470-6507
Support: https://actionsoftware.com/support/

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: FW: COBOL NJ

[Paul Gilmartin]

On Sun, 5 Apr 2020 23:13:14 +, Seymour J Metz wrote:
>
>
>From: Jack J. Woehr
>Sent: Sunday, April 5, 2020 6:40 PM
>
>Can someone please ask to the list to whom to apply for COBOL volunteers
>for New Jersey?
>
>Friends are asking me.
> 
From another list:
https://forms.business.nj.gov/tech/

-- gil

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

regarding the 'shortage of mainframe talent'

[Stan Saraczewski]

Question - how does a semi retired person secure part time projects ? There
is a difficulty getting past the 40 hour a week retirement...

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Bringing up skills learned on z/OS Hercules in interview?

[Grant Taylor]

On 4/8/20 1:13 PM, SUBSCRIBE IBM-MAIN Brandon Tucker wrote:

Greetings!


Hello,

I've always wondered if it was a good idea bringing up skills 
acquired by using z/OS Hercules with a copy of 1.10 floating on the 
internet?


I think it's always pertinent to bring up skills that you acquired on a 
mainframe that you had access to.


I think I would elide, if not actively avoid, that it was illegally 
using licensed IBM software on a non-IBM emulator.


Has anyone heard of someone doing this during an interview? Or what 
would you do/think if someone did this?


With things like Master the Mainframe and hobbyists running their own 
machines, it's not outside of the realm of possibility for people to 
have access to a mainframe to learn.  It does take effort.  But it is 
possible.



Thanks!


:-)



--
Grant. . . .
unix || die

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Bringing up skills learned on z/OS Hercules in interview?

[Wayne Bickerdike]

I would consider you to be a person who really likes to learn. I wouldn't
mention in an interview with IBM. When can you start?

On Thu, Apr 9, 2020, 05:24 SUBSCRIBE IBM-MAIN Brandon Tucker <
b-tuc...@live.com> wrote:

> Greetings!
>
> I've always wondered if it was a good idea bringing up skills acquired by
> using z/OS Hercules with a copy of 1.10 floating on the internet?
>
> Has anyone heard of someone doing this during an interview? Or what would
> you do/think if someone did this?
>
> Thanks!
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - Weirdware

[Wayne Bickerdike]

My first and only recursive program was written in PL1. To avoid a GOTO.
Wrong! S80A abend. Would probably work today with copious amounts of
memory.

On Thu, Apr 9, 2020, 02:40 Frank Swarbrick 
wrote:

> Yes, very verbose.
> And yes, recursion is possible, but you must specify "IS RECURSIVE" on the
> PROGRAM-ID.  Not sure what having nested programs has to do with that,
> though.
>
> 
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf
> of David Crayford 
> Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 7:44 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
> Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? -
> Weirdware
>
> Wow, and some people criticize Java for being verbose!
>
> So using nested programs one can implement recursion in COBOL which you
> couldn't do before without using a table stack.
>
> On 2020-04-08 5:14 AM, Frank Swarbrick wrote:
> > Nested subroutines.
> >
> > Small example:
> >
> >   ID DIVISION.
> >   PROGRAM-NAME. MAINPROG.
> >   [...]
> >   PROCEDURE DIVISION.
> >   CALL 'NESTED-PROGRAM-1'
> >   GOBACK.
> >
> >   ID DIVISION.
> >   PROGRAM-ID. NESTED-PROGRAM-1.
> >   DATA DIVISION.
> >   WORKING-STORAGE SECTION.
> >   01  LOCAL-VAR-1 PIC X.
> >   [...]
> >   PROCEDURE DIVISION.
> >   DISPLAY 'IN NESTED-PROGRAM-1'
> >   GOBACK.
> >
> >   END PROGRAM NESTED-PROGRAM-1.
> >
> >   END PROGRAM MAINPROG.
> >
> > 
> > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on
> behalf of David Spiegel 
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 2:58 PM
> > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
> > Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications?
> - Weirdware
> >
> > Hi Frank,
> > Thank you for that information.
> > (All the COBOL I support(ed) didn't contain these and neither did my
> > university courses in the '70s.)
> >
> > If I wanted to look them up, which keyword(s) would I use?
> >
> > Thanks and regards,
> > David
> >
> > On 2020-04-07 15:49, Frank Swarbrick wrote:
> >> Internal subroutines and local variables have been supported since
> COBOL 1985 (VS COBOL II era).
> >> They're not ideal, but they do exist.
> >>
> >> 
> >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on
> behalf of David Spiegel 
> >> Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 12:58 PM
> >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
> >> Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications?
> - Weirdware
> >>
> >> How about no internal subroutines with local variables?
> >>
> >> On 2020-04-07 14:47, Bob Bridges wrote:
> >>> I used to bad-mouth COBOL, and I still prefer languages that are less
> wordy.  But I came somewhat reluctantly to see that it has its strengths.
> The one I think most important is that it encourages even novice
> programmers to organize their logic in what we used to call a "top-down"
> manner:  This paragraph accomplish a certain task by executing paragraphs
> one through three, then two more, and this subparagraph executes
> subsubparagraphs, and so on.  Forms good habits, I think.
> >>>
> >>> ---
> >>> Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313
> >>>
> >>> /* My life is in the hands of any fool who can make me lose my
> temper.  -driving motto */
> >>>
> >>> -Original Message-
> >>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
> On Behalf Of scott Ford
> >>> Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 12:55
> >>>
> >>> I learned Assembler first and then Cobol and then some PL/1.  I always
> felt each language had its strengths and weaknesses and all were like tools
> in a toolbox.
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> >>> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
> >>> .
> >> --
> >> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> >> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
> >>
> >> --
> >> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> >> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
> >> .
> > --
> > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
> >
> > --
> > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>
> --
> For 

Re: Bringing up skills learned on z/OS Hercules in interview?

[Seymour J Metz]

It's never a good idea in an interview to say that you run pirated software. 
But for those who have zPDT or some other legal platform, I'd mention it. 
Likewise those running OS/VS2 R3.8 on Hercules - dated, but a lot of things 
carry through.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
SUBSCRIBE IBM-MAIN Brandon Tucker [b-tuc...@live.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 8, 2020 3:13 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Bringing up skills learned on z/OS Hercules in interview?

Greetings!

I've always wondered if it was a good idea bringing up skills acquired by using 
z/OS Hercules with a copy of 1.10 floating on the internet?

Has anyone heard of someone doing this during an interview? Or what would you 
do/think if someone did this?

Thanks!

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: New Jersey Pleas for COBOL Coders for Mainframes Amid Coronavirus Pandemic

[Seymour J Metz]

The mainframe system in NJ is a lot newer than C*, which none of the media call 
aging. The console in the article isn't even the right vendor.

* Which is also a half century old. The difference in age
  is only a decade. 


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Barkow, Eileen [02bc504b1642-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, April 8, 2020 3:08 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: New Jersey Pleas for COBOL Coders for Mainframes Amid Coronavirus 
Pandemic

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/08/business/coronavirus-cobol-programmers-new-jersey-trnd/index.html

-Original Message-
From: Barkow, Eileen
Sent: Wednesday, April 8, 2020 1:32 PM
To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
Subject: RE: New Jersey Pleas for COBOL Coders for Mainframes Amid Coronavirus 
Pandemic

NJ Gov Murphy just mentioned need for Cobol programmers during his press 
conference currently going on.
Someone must have mentioned it to him - maybe he knows about IBM-MAIN

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Seymour J Metz
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 11:57 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: New Jersey Pleas for COBOL Coders for Mainframes Amid Coronavirus 
Pandemic

https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FLisp_%2528programming_language%2529data=02%7C01%7Cebarkow%40doitt.nyc.gov%7Ca49cf63e69ab4fa4f77208d7db70f7c4%7C73d61799c28440228d4154cc4f1929ef%7C0%7C0%7C637219150550221126sdata=MrSiwgql6bFs4pv87tw2VEmPhWtmOXa1R9BGmKfYOnQ%3Dreserved=0

https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FPrologdata=02%7C01%7Cebarkow%40doitt.nyc.gov%7Ca49cf63e69ab4fa4f77208d7db70f7c4%7C73d61799c28440228d4154cc4f1929ef%7C0%7C0%7C637219150550221126sdata=VUaH7%2B1N7yT6%2BpTms131c2Yg%2Bk61yocbmc3z8hdFuu8%3Dreserved=0


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http:%2F%2Fmason.gmu.edu%2F~smetz3data=02%7C01%7Cebarkow%40doitt.nyc.gov%7Ca49cf63e69ab4fa4f77208d7db70f7c4%7C73d61799c28440228d4154cc4f1929ef%7C0%7C0%7C637219150550221126sdata=5s7ayYuwLKZDooVWeo0E4uBYO95BzA37sdhuTOEZq7U%3Dreserved=0


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
PINION, RICHARD W. [rpin...@firsthorizon.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 4:49 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: New Jersey Pleas for COBOL Coders for Mainframes Amid Coronavirus 
Pandemic

WISP???

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Seymour J Metz
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 4:48 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: New Jersey Pleas for COBOL Coders for Mainframes Amid Coronavirus 
Pandemic

[External Email. Exercise caution when clicking links or opening attachments.]

It's an AI language and it operates by matching things against rules. It's a 
totally different approach from LISP, which also doesn't look much like COBOL.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http:%2F%2Fmason.gmu.edu%2F~smetz3data=02%7C01%7Cebarkow%40doitt.nyc.gov%7Ca49cf63e69ab4fa4f77208d7db70f7c4%7C73d61799c28440228d4154cc4f1929ef%7C0%7C0%7C637219150550221126sdata=5s7ayYuwLKZDooVWeo0E4uBYO95BzA37sdhuTOEZq7U%3Dreserved=0


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Bob 
Bridges [robhbrid...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 4:30 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: New Jersey Pleas for COBOL Coders for Mainframes Amid Coronavirus 
Pandemic

I'm not familiar with Prolog, but if it doesn't (in John's words) do Input, 
Process or Output I can see it wouldn't have much in common with COBOL.

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* The conviction of the rich that the poor are happier is no more foolish than 
the conviction of the poor that the rich are.  -Mark Twain */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Seymour J Metz
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 15:53

I don't see much commonality between, e.g., COBOL and Prolog.


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Nightwatch RenBand [johnmattson...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 11:06 AM

I totally agree with Bob Bridges.  It can be boiled down to "all programming 
languages do the same things, just in, of ten, slightly different ways."  Learn 
one, and you have a head start to learning any of them.

Best thing I learned: Virtually all programs come down to Input, Process, 
Output.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 

Bringing up skills learned on z/OS Hercules in interview?

[SUBSCRIBE IBM-MAIN Brandon Tucker]

Greetings!

I've always wondered if it was a good idea bringing up skills acquired by using 
z/OS Hercules with a copy of 1.10 floating on the internet? 

Has anyone heard of someone doing this during an interview? Or what would you 
do/think if someone did this?

Thanks!

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: New Jersey Pleas for COBOL Coders for Mainframes Amid Coronavirus Pandemic

[Brandon Tucker]

Per this article:

"The governor's call for COBOL programming help has been fruitful, with several 
volunteers stepping up to help with maintaining the old mainframes."
...
"The state plans to update its COVID-19 website to allow other occupational 
fields to volunteer for technology aid without the need for medical training."

Sounds like some people have already gotten through, and the state will put up 
a website soon for people to volunteer.

https://thehill.com/homenews/news/491526-nj-seeking-help-from-cobol-programmers-in-coronavirus-fight

Sent from Outlook Mobile


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of 
Barkow, Eileen <02bc504b1642-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, April 8, 2020 1:32:18 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
Subject: Re: New Jersey Pleas for COBOL Coders for Mainframes Amid Coronavirus 
Pandemic

NJ Gov Murphy just mentioned need for Cobol programmers during his press 
conference currently going on.
Someone must have mentioned it to him - maybe he knows about IBM-MAIN

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Seymour J Metz
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 11:57 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: New Jersey Pleas for COBOL Coders for Mainframes Amid Coronavirus 
Pandemic

https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FLisp_%2528programming_language%2529data=02%7C01%7Cebarkow%40doitt.nyc.gov%7Ca49cf63e69ab4fa4f77208d7db70f7c4%7C73d61799c28440228d4154cc4f1929ef%7C0%7C0%7C637219150550221126sdata=MrSiwgql6bFs4pv87tw2VEmPhWtmOXa1R9BGmKfYOnQ%3Dreserved=0

https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FPrologdata=02%7C01%7Cebarkow%40doitt.nyc.gov%7Ca49cf63e69ab4fa4f77208d7db70f7c4%7C73d61799c28440228d4154cc4f1929ef%7C0%7C0%7C637219150550221126sdata=VUaH7%2B1N7yT6%2BpTms131c2Yg%2Bk61yocbmc3z8hdFuu8%3Dreserved=0


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http:%2F%2Fmason.gmu.edu%2F~smetz3data=02%7C01%7Cebarkow%40doitt.nyc.gov%7Ca49cf63e69ab4fa4f77208d7db70f7c4%7C73d61799c28440228d4154cc4f1929ef%7C0%7C0%7C637219150550221126sdata=5s7ayYuwLKZDooVWeo0E4uBYO95BzA37sdhuTOEZq7U%3Dreserved=0


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
PINION, RICHARD W. [rpin...@firsthorizon.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 4:49 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: New Jersey Pleas for COBOL Coders for Mainframes Amid Coronavirus 
Pandemic

WISP???

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Seymour J Metz
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 4:48 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: New Jersey Pleas for COBOL Coders for Mainframes Amid Coronavirus 
Pandemic

[External Email. Exercise caution when clicking links or opening attachments.]

It's an AI language and it operates by matching things against rules. It's a 
totally different approach from LISP, which also doesn't look much like COBOL.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http:%2F%2Fmason.gmu.edu%2F~smetz3data=02%7C01%7Cebarkow%40doitt.nyc.gov%7Ca49cf63e69ab4fa4f77208d7db70f7c4%7C73d61799c28440228d4154cc4f1929ef%7C0%7C0%7C637219150550221126sdata=5s7ayYuwLKZDooVWeo0E4uBYO95BzA37sdhuTOEZq7U%3Dreserved=0


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Bob 
Bridges [robhbrid...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 4:30 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: New Jersey Pleas for COBOL Coders for Mainframes Amid Coronavirus 
Pandemic

I'm not familiar with Prolog, but if it doesn't (in John's words) do Input, 
Process or Output I can see it wouldn't have much in common with COBOL.

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* The conviction of the rich that the poor are happier is no more foolish than 
the conviction of the poor that the rich are.  -Mark Twain */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Seymour J Metz
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 15:53

I don't see much commonality between, e.g., COBOL and Prolog.


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Nightwatch RenBand [johnmattson...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 11:06 AM

I totally agree with Bob Bridges.  It can be boiled down to "all programming 
languages do the same things, just in, of ten, slightly different ways."  Learn 
one, and you have a head start to learning any of them.

Best thing I learned: Virtually all programs come down to Input, Process, 
Output.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the 

Re: New Jersey Pleas for COBOL Coders for Mainframes Amid Coronavirus Pandemic

[Barkow, Eileen]

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/08/business/coronavirus-cobol-programmers-new-jersey-trnd/index.html

-Original Message-
From: Barkow, Eileen
Sent: Wednesday, April 8, 2020 1:32 PM
To: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 
Subject: RE: New Jersey Pleas for COBOL Coders for Mainframes Amid Coronavirus 
Pandemic

NJ Gov Murphy just mentioned need for Cobol programmers during his press 
conference currently going on.
Someone must have mentioned it to him - maybe he knows about IBM-MAIN

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Seymour J Metz
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 11:57 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: New Jersey Pleas for COBOL Coders for Mainframes Amid Coronavirus 
Pandemic

https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FLisp_%2528programming_language%2529data=02%7C01%7Cebarkow%40doitt.nyc.gov%7Ca49cf63e69ab4fa4f77208d7db70f7c4%7C73d61799c28440228d4154cc4f1929ef%7C0%7C0%7C637219150550221126sdata=MrSiwgql6bFs4pv87tw2VEmPhWtmOXa1R9BGmKfYOnQ%3Dreserved=0

https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FPrologdata=02%7C01%7Cebarkow%40doitt.nyc.gov%7Ca49cf63e69ab4fa4f77208d7db70f7c4%7C73d61799c28440228d4154cc4f1929ef%7C0%7C0%7C637219150550221126sdata=VUaH7%2B1N7yT6%2BpTms131c2Yg%2Bk61yocbmc3z8hdFuu8%3Dreserved=0


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http:%2F%2Fmason.gmu.edu%2F~smetz3data=02%7C01%7Cebarkow%40doitt.nyc.gov%7Ca49cf63e69ab4fa4f77208d7db70f7c4%7C73d61799c28440228d4154cc4f1929ef%7C0%7C0%7C637219150550221126sdata=5s7ayYuwLKZDooVWeo0E4uBYO95BzA37sdhuTOEZq7U%3Dreserved=0


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
PINION, RICHARD W. [rpin...@firsthorizon.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 4:49 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: New Jersey Pleas for COBOL Coders for Mainframes Amid Coronavirus 
Pandemic

WISP???

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Seymour J Metz
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 4:48 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: New Jersey Pleas for COBOL Coders for Mainframes Amid Coronavirus 
Pandemic

[External Email. Exercise caution when clicking links or opening attachments.]

It's an AI language and it operates by matching things against rules. It's a 
totally different approach from LISP, which also doesn't look much like COBOL.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http:%2F%2Fmason.gmu.edu%2F~smetz3data=02%7C01%7Cebarkow%40doitt.nyc.gov%7Ca49cf63e69ab4fa4f77208d7db70f7c4%7C73d61799c28440228d4154cc4f1929ef%7C0%7C0%7C637219150550221126sdata=5s7ayYuwLKZDooVWeo0E4uBYO95BzA37sdhuTOEZq7U%3Dreserved=0


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Bob 
Bridges [robhbrid...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 4:30 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: New Jersey Pleas for COBOL Coders for Mainframes Amid Coronavirus 
Pandemic

I'm not familiar with Prolog, but if it doesn't (in John's words) do Input, 
Process or Output I can see it wouldn't have much in common with COBOL.

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* The conviction of the rich that the poor are happier is no more foolish than 
the conviction of the poor that the rich are.  -Mark Twain */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Seymour J Metz
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 15:53

I don't see much commonality between, e.g., COBOL and Prolog.


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Nightwatch RenBand [johnmattson...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 11:06 AM

I totally agree with Bob Bridges.  It can be boiled down to "all programming 
languages do the same things, just in, of ten, slightly different ways."  Learn 
one, and you have a head start to learning any of them.

Best thing I learned: Virtually all programs come down to Input, Process, 
Output.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN Confidentiality notice:
This e-mail message, including any attachments, may contain legally privileged 
and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient(s), or 
the employee or agent responsible for delivery of this message to the intended 
recipient(s), you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or 
copying of this e-mail message 

Re: New Jersey Pleas for COBOL Coders for Mainframes Amid Coronavirus Pandemic

[Barkow, Eileen]

NJ Gov Murphy just mentioned need for Cobol programmers during his press 
conference currently going on.
Someone must have mentioned it to him - maybe he knows about IBM-MAIN

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Seymour J Metz
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 11:57 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: New Jersey Pleas for COBOL Coders for Mainframes Amid Coronavirus 
Pandemic

https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FLisp_%2528programming_language%2529data=02%7C01%7Cebarkow%40doitt.nyc.gov%7Ca49cf63e69ab4fa4f77208d7db70f7c4%7C73d61799c28440228d4154cc4f1929ef%7C0%7C0%7C637219150550221126sdata=MrSiwgql6bFs4pv87tw2VEmPhWtmOXa1R9BGmKfYOnQ%3Dreserved=0

https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FPrologdata=02%7C01%7Cebarkow%40doitt.nyc.gov%7Ca49cf63e69ab4fa4f77208d7db70f7c4%7C73d61799c28440228d4154cc4f1929ef%7C0%7C0%7C637219150550221126sdata=VUaH7%2B1N7yT6%2BpTms131c2Yg%2Bk61yocbmc3z8hdFuu8%3Dreserved=0


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http:%2F%2Fmason.gmu.edu%2F~smetz3data=02%7C01%7Cebarkow%40doitt.nyc.gov%7Ca49cf63e69ab4fa4f77208d7db70f7c4%7C73d61799c28440228d4154cc4f1929ef%7C0%7C0%7C637219150550221126sdata=5s7ayYuwLKZDooVWeo0E4uBYO95BzA37sdhuTOEZq7U%3Dreserved=0


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
PINION, RICHARD W. [rpin...@firsthorizon.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 4:49 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: New Jersey Pleas for COBOL Coders for Mainframes Amid Coronavirus 
Pandemic

WISP???

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  On Behalf Of 
Seymour J Metz
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 4:48 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: New Jersey Pleas for COBOL Coders for Mainframes Amid Coronavirus 
Pandemic

[External Email. Exercise caution when clicking links or opening attachments.]

It's an AI language and it operates by matching things against rules. It's a 
totally different approach from LISP, which also doesn't look much like COBOL.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http:%2F%2Fmason.gmu.edu%2F~smetz3data=02%7C01%7Cebarkow%40doitt.nyc.gov%7Ca49cf63e69ab4fa4f77208d7db70f7c4%7C73d61799c28440228d4154cc4f1929ef%7C0%7C0%7C637219150550221126sdata=5s7ayYuwLKZDooVWeo0E4uBYO95BzA37sdhuTOEZq7U%3Dreserved=0


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Bob 
Bridges [robhbrid...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 4:30 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: New Jersey Pleas for COBOL Coders for Mainframes Amid Coronavirus 
Pandemic

I'm not familiar with Prolog, but if it doesn't (in John's words) do Input, 
Process or Output I can see it wouldn't have much in common with COBOL.

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* The conviction of the rich that the poor are happier is no more foolish than 
the conviction of the poor that the rich are.  -Mark Twain */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of Seymour J Metz
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 15:53

I don't see much commonality between, e.g., COBOL and Prolog.


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
Nightwatch RenBand [johnmattson...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 11:06 AM

I totally agree with Bob Bridges.  It can be boiled down to "all programming 
languages do the same things, just in, of ten, slightly different ways."  Learn 
one, and you have a head start to learning any of them.

Best thing I learned: Virtually all programs come down to Input, Process, 
Output.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 
lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN Confidentiality notice:
This e-mail message, including any attachments, may contain legally privileged 
and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient(s), or 
the employee or agent responsible for delivery of this message to the intended 
recipient(s), you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or 
copying of this e-mail message is strictly prohibited. If you have received 
this message in error, please immediately notify the sender and delete this 
e-mail message from your computer.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to 

Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - Weirdware

[Frank Swarbrick]

Yes, very verbose.
And yes, recursion is possible, but you must specify "IS RECURSIVE" on the 
PROGRAM-ID.  Not sure what having nested programs has to do with that, though.


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of 
David Crayford 
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 7:44 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - 
Weirdware

Wow, and some people criticize Java for being verbose!

So using nested programs one can implement recursion in COBOL which you
couldn't do before without using a table stack.

On 2020-04-08 5:14 AM, Frank Swarbrick wrote:
> Nested subroutines.
>
> Small example:
>
>   ID DIVISION.
>   PROGRAM-NAME. MAINPROG.
>   [...]
>   PROCEDURE DIVISION.
>   CALL 'NESTED-PROGRAM-1'
>   GOBACK.
>
>   ID DIVISION.
>   PROGRAM-ID. NESTED-PROGRAM-1.
>   DATA DIVISION.
>   WORKING-STORAGE SECTION.
>   01  LOCAL-VAR-1 PIC X.
>   [...]
>   PROCEDURE DIVISION.
>   DISPLAY 'IN NESTED-PROGRAM-1'
>   GOBACK.
>
>   END PROGRAM NESTED-PROGRAM-1.
>
>   END PROGRAM MAINPROG.
>
> 
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of 
> David Spiegel 
> Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 2:58 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
> Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - 
> Weirdware
>
> Hi Frank,
> Thank you for that information.
> (All the COBOL I support(ed) didn't contain these and neither did my
> university courses in the '70s.)
>
> If I wanted to look them up, which keyword(s) would I use?
>
> Thanks and regards,
> David
>
> On 2020-04-07 15:49, Frank Swarbrick wrote:
>> Internal subroutines and local variables have been supported since COBOL 
>> 1985 (VS COBOL II era).
>> They're not ideal, but they do exist.
>>
>> 
>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of 
>> David Spiegel 
>> Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 12:58 PM
>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
>> Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - 
>> Weirdware
>>
>> How about no internal subroutines with local variables?
>>
>> On 2020-04-07 14:47, Bob Bridges wrote:
>>> I used to bad-mouth COBOL, and I still prefer languages that are less 
>>> wordy.  But I came somewhat reluctantly to see that it has its strengths.  
>>> The one I think most important is that it encourages even novice 
>>> programmers to organize their logic in what we used to call a "top-down" 
>>> manner:  This paragraph accomplish a certain task by executing paragraphs 
>>> one through three, then two more, and this subparagraph executes 
>>> subsubparagraphs, and so on.  Forms good habits, I think.
>>>
>>> ---
>>> Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313
>>>
>>> /* My life is in the hands of any fool who can make me lose my temper.  
>>> -driving motto */
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On 
>>> Behalf Of scott Ford
>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 12:55
>>>
>>> I learned Assembler first and then Cobol and then some PL/1.  I always felt 
>>> each language had its strengths and weaknesses and all were like tools in a 
>>> toolbox.
>>>
>>> --
>>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>>> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>>> .
>> --
>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>>
>> --
>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
>> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>> .
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - Weirdware

[Seymour J Metz]

PKB. It's offensive to try to put words in my mouth.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
David Crayford [dcrayf...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 8, 2020 10:22 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - 
Weirdware

On 2020-04-08 9:26 PM, Seymour J Metz wrote:
> Have you stopped beating your wife?
That's offensive and you you should think twice before making comments
like that!

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

IBM PEM (Partner Engagement Manager) Product.

[Sasso, Len]

What is your experience with the IBM PEM (Partner Engagement Manager) Product?

Is your company using PEM in Production?

If not, why?

Is training available?

If so, who provides it?

I welcome your comments, suggestions, etc.
Thank You!
Len Sasso
Systems Administrator Senior
CSRA, A General Dynamics Information Technology Company
327 Columbia TPKE
Rensselaer, NY 12144

Office Hours:  M-F  7A - 3:45 pm
Out-Of-The-Office:
Phone: (518) 257-4209
Cell: (518) 894-0879
Fax: (518) 257-4300
len.sa...@gdit.com
URL: www.gdit.com


This electronic message transmission contains information from GDIT that may be 
attorney-client privileged, proprietary or confidential. The information in 
this message is intended only for use by the individual(s) to whom it is 
addressed. If you believe you have received this message in error, please 
contact me immediately and be aware that any use, disclosure, copying or 
distribution of the contents of this message is strictly prohibited. NOTE: 
Regardless of content, this email shall not operate to bind GDIT to any order 
or other contract unless pursuant to explicit written agreement or government 
initiative expressly permitting the use of email for such purpose.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - Weirdware

[David Crayford]

On 2020-04-08 9:26 PM, Seymour J Metz wrote:

Have you stopped beating your wife?
That's offensive and you you should think twice before making comments 
like that!


--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - Weirdware

[Seymour J Metz]

> What's wrong with extending the standard on the platform where COBOL rules?

Have you stopped beating your wife? Your "question" is an asservtion contrary 
to fact; I never suggested that there is anything wrong with extensions. What I 
did suggest is that the semantics of a language are in the defining document, 
and that the semantics of the extension are irrelevant to determining the 
semantics of the language itself.

> The mainframe's raison d'être is to run COBOL programs! 

ROTF,LMAO. I have decades of experience with mainframes running no COBOL code.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
David Crayford [dcrayf...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 8, 2020 8:36 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - 
Weirdware

What's wrong with extending the standard on the platform where COBOL
rules? The mainframe's raison d'être is to run COBOL programs! The ANSI
standard specifies OO but that seems to be only for Java interop on z/OS.

On 2020-04-08 8:30 PM, Seymour J Metz wrote:
> Either ANSI requires allowing recursive inner subroutines or it doesn't. If 
> ANSI requires it then IBM isn't ANSI compliant; if ANSI doesn't require it 
> then it clearly has to do with COBOL semantics and the other compilers have 
> extended the standard. If ANSI doesn't require it then the question remains 
> why not.
>
>
> --
> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
>
> 
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
> David Crayford [dcrayf...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 8, 2020 7:37 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - 
> Weirdware
>
> On 2020-04-08 7:24 PM, Seymour J Metz wrote:
>>> Recursive programs cannot contain nested subprograms.
>> Why, in the name of the great lord Harry, not? I'll stick to PL/I, TYVM.
> COBOL semantics probably don't have anything to do with it as other
> COBOL compilers support it.
> I would suggest it's an implementation detail with how z/OS COBOL
> allocates LOCAL-STORAGE.
>
>
>>
>> --
>> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
>> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
>>
>> 
>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
>> David Crayford [dcrayf...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, April 8, 2020 4:37 AM
>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>> Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - 
>> Weirdware
>>
>> *RECURSIVE*
>>   An optional clause that allows COBOL programs to be recursively
>>   reentered.
>>
>>   You can specify the RECURSIVE clause only on the outermost program
>>   of a compilation unit. Recursive programs cannot contain nested
>>   subprograms.
>>
>>   If the RECURSIVE clause is specified, program-name can be
>>   recursively reentered while a previous invocation is still active.
>>   If the RECURSIVE clause is not specified, an active program cannot
>>   be recursively reentered.
>>
>> On 2020-04-08 4:09 PM, Mike Schwab wrote:
>>> PROGRAM-ID pgmname RECURSIVE.
>>>
>>> https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/en/SS6SG3_4.2.0/com.ibm.entcobol.doc_4.2/PGandLR/tasks/tpsubw03.htm
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 9:47 PM Seymour J Metz  wrote:
 Maybe,but there's nothing in his example to suggest that COBOL supports 
 recursion; you'd have to check the documentation.


 --
 Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
 http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3

 
 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf 
 of David Crayford [dcrayf...@gmail.com]
 Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 9:44 PM
 To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
 Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - 
 Weirdware

 Wow, and some people criticize Java for being verbose!

 So using nested programs one can implement recursion in COBOL which you
 couldn't do before without using a table stack.

 On 2020-04-08 5:14 AM, Frank Swarbrick wrote:
> Nested subroutines.
>
> Small example:
>
>  ID DIVISION.
>  PROGRAM-NAME. MAINPROG.
>  [...]
>  PROCEDURE DIVISION.
>  CALL 'NESTED-PROGRAM-1'
>  GOBACK.
>
>  ID DIVISION.
>  PROGRAM-ID. NESTED-PROGRAM-1.
>  DATA DIVISION.
>  WORKING-STORAGE SECTION.
>  01  LOCAL-VAR-1 PIC X.
>  [...]
>  PROCEDURE DIVISION.
>  DISPLAY 'IN NESTED-PROGRAM-1'
>  GOBACK.
>
>  END PROGRAM NESTED-PROGRAM-1.
>
>  END PROGRAM MAINPROG.
>
> 
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion 

Re: Happy Passover and Easter to all

[Steve Beaver]

And to you Sir

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of ITschak Mugzach
Sent: Wednesday, April 8, 2020 7:55 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Happy Passover and Easter to all

Happy Passover today to our Jewish members and a Happy Easter (on Sunday)
to the Christians.

ITschak

ITschak Mugzach
*|** IronSphere Platform* *|* *Information Security Continuous Monitoring
for z/OS, x/Linux & IBM I **| z/VM comming son  *

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Happy Passover and Easter to all

[ITschak Mugzach]

Happy Passover today to our Jewish members and a Happy Easter (on Sunday)
to the Christians.

ITschak

ITschak Mugzach
*|** IronSphere Platform* *|* *Information Security Continuous Monitoring
for z/OS, x/Linux & IBM I **| z/VM comming son  *

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - Weirdware

[David Crayford]

What's wrong with extending the standard on the platform where COBOL 
rules? The mainframe's raison d'être is to run COBOL programs! The ANSI 
standard specifies OO but that seems to be only for Java interop on z/OS.


On 2020-04-08 8:30 PM, Seymour J Metz wrote:

Either ANSI requires allowing recursive inner subroutines or it doesn't. If 
ANSI requires it then IBM isn't ANSI compliant; if ANSI doesn't require it then 
it clearly has to do with COBOL semantics and the other compilers have extended 
the standard. If ANSI doesn't require it then the question remains why not.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
David Crayford [dcrayf...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 8, 2020 7:37 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - 
Weirdware

On 2020-04-08 7:24 PM, Seymour J Metz wrote:

Recursive programs cannot contain nested subprograms.

Why, in the name of the great lord Harry, not? I'll stick to PL/I, TYVM.

COBOL semantics probably don't have anything to do with it as other
COBOL compilers support it.
I would suggest it's an implementation detail with how z/OS COBOL
allocates LOCAL-STORAGE.




--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
David Crayford [dcrayf...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 8, 2020 4:37 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - 
Weirdware

*RECURSIVE*
  An optional clause that allows COBOL programs to be recursively
  reentered.

  You can specify the RECURSIVE clause only on the outermost program
  of a compilation unit. Recursive programs cannot contain nested
  subprograms.

  If the RECURSIVE clause is specified, program-name can be
  recursively reentered while a previous invocation is still active.
  If the RECURSIVE clause is not specified, an active program cannot
  be recursively reentered.

On 2020-04-08 4:09 PM, Mike Schwab wrote:

PROGRAM-ID pgmname RECURSIVE.

https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/en/SS6SG3_4.2.0/com.ibm.entcobol.doc_4.2/PGandLR/tasks/tpsubw03.htm

On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 9:47 PM Seymour J Metz  wrote:

Maybe,but there's nothing in his example to suggest that COBOL supports 
recursion; you'd have to check the documentation.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
David Crayford [dcrayf...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 9:44 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - 
Weirdware

Wow, and some people criticize Java for being verbose!

So using nested programs one can implement recursion in COBOL which you
couldn't do before without using a table stack.

On 2020-04-08 5:14 AM, Frank Swarbrick wrote:

Nested subroutines.

Small example:

 ID DIVISION.
 PROGRAM-NAME. MAINPROG.
 [...]
 PROCEDURE DIVISION.
 CALL 'NESTED-PROGRAM-1'
 GOBACK.

 ID DIVISION.
 PROGRAM-ID. NESTED-PROGRAM-1.
 DATA DIVISION.
 WORKING-STORAGE SECTION.
 01  LOCAL-VAR-1 PIC X.
 [...]
 PROCEDURE DIVISION.
 DISPLAY 'IN NESTED-PROGRAM-1'
 GOBACK.

 END PROGRAM NESTED-PROGRAM-1.

 END PROGRAM MAINPROG.


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of David 
Spiegel 
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 2:58 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - 
Weirdware

Hi Frank,
Thank you for that information.
(All the COBOL I support(ed) didn't contain these and neither did my
university courses in the '70s.)

If I wanted to look them up, which keyword(s) would I use?

Thanks and regards,
David

On 2020-04-07 15:49, Frank Swarbrick wrote:

Internal subroutines and local variables have been supported since COBOL 1985 
(VS COBOL II era).
They're not ideal, but they do exist.


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of David 
Spiegel 
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 12:58 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - 
Weirdware

How about no internal subroutines with local variables?

On 2020-04-07 14:47, Bob Bridges wrote:

I used to bad-mouth COBOL, and I still prefer languages that are less wordy.  But I came 
somewhat reluctantly to see that it has its strengths.  The one I think most important is 
that it encourages even novice programmers to organize their logic in what we used to 
call a "top-down" manner:  This paragraph accomplish a certain task by 
executing paragraphs one through 

Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - Weirdware

[Seymour J Metz]

Either ANSI requires allowing recursive inner subroutines or it doesn't. If 
ANSI requires it then IBM isn't ANSI compliant; if ANSI doesn't require it then 
it clearly has to do with COBOL semantics and the other compilers have extended 
the standard. If ANSI doesn't require it then the question remains why not.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
David Crayford [dcrayf...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 8, 2020 7:37 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - 
Weirdware

On 2020-04-08 7:24 PM, Seymour J Metz wrote:
>> Recursive programs cannot contain nested subprograms.
> Why, in the name of the great lord Harry, not? I'll stick to PL/I, TYVM.

COBOL semantics probably don't have anything to do with it as other
COBOL compilers support it.
I would suggest it's an implementation detail with how z/OS COBOL
allocates LOCAL-STORAGE.


>
>
> --
> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
>
> 
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
> David Crayford [dcrayf...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 8, 2020 4:37 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - 
> Weirdware
>
> *RECURSIVE*
>  An optional clause that allows COBOL programs to be recursively
>  reentered.
>
>  You can specify the RECURSIVE clause only on the outermost program
>  of a compilation unit. Recursive programs cannot contain nested
>  subprograms.
>
>  If the RECURSIVE clause is specified, program-name can be
>  recursively reentered while a previous invocation is still active.
>  If the RECURSIVE clause is not specified, an active program cannot
>  be recursively reentered.
>
> On 2020-04-08 4:09 PM, Mike Schwab wrote:
>> PROGRAM-ID pgmname RECURSIVE.
>>
>> https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/en/SS6SG3_4.2.0/com.ibm.entcobol.doc_4.2/PGandLR/tasks/tpsubw03.htm
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 9:47 PM Seymour J Metz  wrote:
>>> Maybe,but there's nothing in his example to suggest that COBOL supports 
>>> recursion; you'd have to check the documentation.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
>>> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
>>>
>>> 
>>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
>>> David Crayford [dcrayf...@gmail.com]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 9:44 PM
>>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>>> Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - 
>>> Weirdware
>>>
>>> Wow, and some people criticize Java for being verbose!
>>>
>>> So using nested programs one can implement recursion in COBOL which you
>>> couldn't do before without using a table stack.
>>>
>>> On 2020-04-08 5:14 AM, Frank Swarbrick wrote:
 Nested subroutines.

 Small example:

 ID DIVISION.
 PROGRAM-NAME. MAINPROG.
 [...]
 PROCEDURE DIVISION.
 CALL 'NESTED-PROGRAM-1'
 GOBACK.

 ID DIVISION.
 PROGRAM-ID. NESTED-PROGRAM-1.
 DATA DIVISION.
 WORKING-STORAGE SECTION.
 01  LOCAL-VAR-1 PIC X.
 [...]
 PROCEDURE DIVISION.
 DISPLAY 'IN NESTED-PROGRAM-1'
 GOBACK.

 END PROGRAM NESTED-PROGRAM-1.

 END PROGRAM MAINPROG.

 
 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf 
 of David Spiegel 
 Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 2:58 PM
 To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
 Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - 
 Weirdware

 Hi Frank,
 Thank you for that information.
 (All the COBOL I support(ed) didn't contain these and neither did my
 university courses in the '70s.)

 If I wanted to look them up, which keyword(s) would I use?

 Thanks and regards,
 David

 On 2020-04-07 15:49, Frank Swarbrick wrote:
> Internal subroutines and local variables have been supported since COBOL 
> 1985 (VS COBOL II era).
> They're not ideal, but they do exist.
>
> 
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf 
> of David Spiegel 
> Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 12:58 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
> Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - 
> Weirdware
>
> How about no internal subroutines with local variables?
>
> On 2020-04-07 14:47, Bob Bridges wrote:
>> I used to bad-mouth COBOL, and I still prefer languages that are less 
>> wordy.  But I came somewhat reluctantly to see that it has its 
>> strengths.  The one I think most important is that it encourages even 

Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - Weirdware

[David Crayford]

On 2020-04-08 7:24 PM, Seymour J Metz wrote:

Recursive programs cannot contain nested subprograms.

Why, in the name of the great lord Harry, not? I'll stick to PL/I, TYVM.


COBOL semantics probably don't have anything to do with it as other 
COBOL compilers support it.
I would suggest it's an implementation detail with how z/OS COBOL 
allocates LOCAL-STORAGE.






--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
David Crayford [dcrayf...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 8, 2020 4:37 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - 
Weirdware

*RECURSIVE*
 An optional clause that allows COBOL programs to be recursively
 reentered.

 You can specify the RECURSIVE clause only on the outermost program
 of a compilation unit. Recursive programs cannot contain nested
 subprograms.

 If the RECURSIVE clause is specified, program-name can be
 recursively reentered while a previous invocation is still active.
 If the RECURSIVE clause is not specified, an active program cannot
 be recursively reentered.

On 2020-04-08 4:09 PM, Mike Schwab wrote:

PROGRAM-ID pgmname RECURSIVE.

https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/en/SS6SG3_4.2.0/com.ibm.entcobol.doc_4.2/PGandLR/tasks/tpsubw03.htm

On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 9:47 PM Seymour J Metz  wrote:

Maybe,but there's nothing in his example to suggest that COBOL supports 
recursion; you'd have to check the documentation.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
David Crayford [dcrayf...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 9:44 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - 
Weirdware

Wow, and some people criticize Java for being verbose!

So using nested programs one can implement recursion in COBOL which you
couldn't do before without using a table stack.

On 2020-04-08 5:14 AM, Frank Swarbrick wrote:

Nested subroutines.

Small example:

ID DIVISION.
PROGRAM-NAME. MAINPROG.
[...]
PROCEDURE DIVISION.
CALL 'NESTED-PROGRAM-1'
GOBACK.

ID DIVISION.
PROGRAM-ID. NESTED-PROGRAM-1.
DATA DIVISION.
WORKING-STORAGE SECTION.
01  LOCAL-VAR-1 PIC X.
[...]
PROCEDURE DIVISION.
DISPLAY 'IN NESTED-PROGRAM-1'
GOBACK.

END PROGRAM NESTED-PROGRAM-1.

END PROGRAM MAINPROG.


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of David 
Spiegel 
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 2:58 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - 
Weirdware

Hi Frank,
Thank you for that information.
(All the COBOL I support(ed) didn't contain these and neither did my
university courses in the '70s.)

If I wanted to look them up, which keyword(s) would I use?

Thanks and regards,
David

On 2020-04-07 15:49, Frank Swarbrick wrote:

Internal subroutines and local variables have been supported since COBOL 1985 
(VS COBOL II era).
They're not ideal, but they do exist.


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of David 
Spiegel 
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 12:58 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - 
Weirdware

How about no internal subroutines with local variables?

On 2020-04-07 14:47, Bob Bridges wrote:

I used to bad-mouth COBOL, and I still prefer languages that are less wordy.  But I came 
somewhat reluctantly to see that it has its strengths.  The one I think most important is 
that it encourages even novice programmers to organize their logic in what we used to 
call a "top-down" manner:  This paragraph accomplish a certain task by 
executing paragraphs one through three, then two more, and this subparagraph executes 
subsubparagraphs, and so on.  Forms good habits, I think.

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* My life is in the hands of any fool who can make me lose my temper.  
-driving motto */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of scott Ford
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 12:55

I learned Assembler first and then Cobol and then some PL/1.  I always felt 
each language had its strengths and weaknesses and all were like tools in a 
toolbox.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with 

Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - Weirdware

[Seymour J Metz]

> Recursive programs cannot contain nested subprograms.

Why, in the name of the great lord Harry, not? I'll stick to PL/I, TYVM.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
David Crayford [dcrayf...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 8, 2020 4:37 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - 
Weirdware

*RECURSIVE*
An optional clause that allows COBOL programs to be recursively
reentered.

You can specify the RECURSIVE clause only on the outermost program
of a compilation unit. Recursive programs cannot contain nested
subprograms.

If the RECURSIVE clause is specified, program-name can be
recursively reentered while a previous invocation is still active.
If the RECURSIVE clause is not specified, an active program cannot
be recursively reentered.

On 2020-04-08 4:09 PM, Mike Schwab wrote:
> PROGRAM-ID pgmname RECURSIVE.
>
> https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/en/SS6SG3_4.2.0/com.ibm.entcobol.doc_4.2/PGandLR/tasks/tpsubw03.htm
>
> On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 9:47 PM Seymour J Metz  wrote:
>> Maybe,but there's nothing in his example to suggest that COBOL supports 
>> recursion; you'd have to check the documentation.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
>> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
>>
>> 
>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
>> David Crayford [dcrayf...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 9:44 PM
>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>> Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - 
>> Weirdware
>>
>> Wow, and some people criticize Java for being verbose!
>>
>> So using nested programs one can implement recursion in COBOL which you
>> couldn't do before without using a table stack.
>>
>> On 2020-04-08 5:14 AM, Frank Swarbrick wrote:
>>> Nested subroutines.
>>>
>>> Small example:
>>>
>>>ID DIVISION.
>>>PROGRAM-NAME. MAINPROG.
>>>[...]
>>>PROCEDURE DIVISION.
>>>CALL 'NESTED-PROGRAM-1'
>>>GOBACK.
>>>
>>>ID DIVISION.
>>>PROGRAM-ID. NESTED-PROGRAM-1.
>>>DATA DIVISION.
>>>WORKING-STORAGE SECTION.
>>>01  LOCAL-VAR-1 PIC X.
>>>[...]
>>>PROCEDURE DIVISION.
>>>DISPLAY 'IN NESTED-PROGRAM-1'
>>>GOBACK.
>>>
>>>END PROGRAM NESTED-PROGRAM-1.
>>>
>>>END PROGRAM MAINPROG.
>>>
>>> 
>>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of 
>>> David Spiegel 
>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 2:58 PM
>>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
>>> Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - 
>>> Weirdware
>>>
>>> Hi Frank,
>>> Thank you for that information.
>>> (All the COBOL I support(ed) didn't contain these and neither did my
>>> university courses in the '70s.)
>>>
>>> If I wanted to look them up, which keyword(s) would I use?
>>>
>>> Thanks and regards,
>>> David
>>>
>>> On 2020-04-07 15:49, Frank Swarbrick wrote:
 Internal subroutines and local variables have been supported since COBOL 
 1985 (VS COBOL II era).
 They're not ideal, but they do exist.

 
 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf 
 of David Spiegel 
 Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 12:58 PM
 To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
 Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - 
 Weirdware

 How about no internal subroutines with local variables?

 On 2020-04-07 14:47, Bob Bridges wrote:
> I used to bad-mouth COBOL, and I still prefer languages that are less 
> wordy.  But I came somewhat reluctantly to see that it has its strengths. 
>  The one I think most important is that it encourages even novice 
> programmers to organize their logic in what we used to call a "top-down" 
> manner:  This paragraph accomplish a certain task by executing paragraphs 
> one through three, then two more, and this subparagraph executes 
> subsubparagraphs, and so on.  Forms good habits, I think.
>
> ---
> Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313
>
> /* My life is in the hands of any fool who can make me lose my temper.  
> -driving motto */
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On 
> Behalf Of scott Ford
> Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 12:55
>
> I learned Assembler first and then Cobol and then some PL/1.  I always 
> felt each language had its strengths and weaknesses and all were like 
> tools in a toolbox.
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO 

Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - Weirdware

[David Crayford]

Unfortunately, probably not. Most of the languages that support 
tail-recursion are dynamically typed or require annotations. Probably a 
bridge too far for COBOL.


On 2020-04-08 4:47 PM, Martin Packer wrote:

I wonder if specifying this leads to compilers doing (optimised)
tail-recursion - where appropriate.

Cheers, Martin

Martin Packer

zChampion, Systems Investigator & Performance Troubleshooter, IBM

+44-7802-245-584

email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com

Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker

Blog:
https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker

Podcast Series (With Marna Walle): https://developer.ibm.com/tv/mpt/or
   
https://itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/mainframe-performance-topics/id1127943573?mt=2



Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCu_65HaYgksbF6Q8SQ4oOvA



From:   David Crayford 
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date:   08/04/2020 09:38
Subject:[EXTERNAL] Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize
key applications? - Weirdware
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List 



*RECURSIVE*
 An optional clause that allows COBOL programs to be recursively
 reentered.

 You can specify the RECURSIVE clause only on the outermost program
 of a compilation unit. Recursive programs cannot contain nested
 subprograms.

 If the RECURSIVE clause is specified, program-name can be
 recursively reentered while a previous invocation is still active.
 If the RECURSIVE clause is not specified, an active program cannot
 be recursively reentered.

On 2020-04-08 4:09 PM, Mike Schwab wrote:

PROGRAM-ID pgmname RECURSIVE.



https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/en/SS6SG3_4.2.0/com.ibm.entcobol.doc_4.2/PGandLR/tasks/tpsubw03.htm


On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 9:47 PM Seymour J Metz  wrote:

Maybe,but there's nothing in his example to suggest that COBOL supports

recursion; you'd have to check the documentation.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz


https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__mason.gmu.edu_-7Esmetz3=DwICaQ=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg=BsPGKdq7-Vl8MW2-WOWZjlZ0NwmcFSpQCLphNznBSDQ=vApB8Pw9Cu4OwyYrwyWnJybkrmVmizS30iIud0_La7E=_ADEInxU_xV_FnsM-OM-2gGrrNOmBgyVWSRzVJfZkSw=



From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on

behalf of David Crayford [dcrayf...@gmail.com]

Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 9:44 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications?

- Weirdware

Wow, and some people criticize Java for being verbose!

So using nested programs one can implement recursion in COBOL which you
couldn't do before without using a table stack.

On 2020-04-08 5:14 AM, Frank Swarbrick wrote:

Nested subroutines.

Small example:

ID DIVISION.
PROGRAM-NAME. MAINPROG.
[...]
PROCEDURE DIVISION.
CALL 'NESTED-PROGRAM-1'
GOBACK.

ID DIVISION.
PROGRAM-ID. NESTED-PROGRAM-1.
DATA DIVISION.
WORKING-STORAGE SECTION.
01  LOCAL-VAR-1 PIC X.
[...]
PROCEDURE DIVISION.
DISPLAY 'IN NESTED-PROGRAM-1'
GOBACK.

END PROGRAM NESTED-PROGRAM-1.

END PROGRAM MAINPROG.


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on

behalf of David Spiegel 

Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 2:58 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key

applications? - Weirdware

Hi Frank,
Thank you for that information.
(All the COBOL I support(ed) didn't contain these and neither did my
university courses in the '70s.)

If I wanted to look them up, which keyword(s) would I use?

Thanks and regards,
David

On 2020-04-07 15:49, Frank Swarbrick wrote:

Internal subroutines and local variables have been supported since

COBOL 1985 (VS COBOL II era).

They're not ideal, but they do exist.


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on

behalf of David Spiegel 

Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 12:58 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key

applications? - Weirdware

How about no internal subroutines with local variables?

On 2020-04-07 14:47, Bob Bridges wrote:

I used to bad-mouth COBOL, and I still prefer languages that are

less wordy.  But I came somewhat reluctantly to see that it has its
strengths.  The one I think most important is that it encourages even
novice programmers to organize their logic in what we used to call a
"top-down" manner:  This paragraph accomplish a certain task by executing
paragraphs one through three, then two more, and this subparagraph
executes subsubparagraphs, and so on.  Forms good habits, I think.

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* My life is in the hands of any fool who can make me lose my

temper.  -driving motto */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU

] On Behalf Of scott Ford

Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 12:55

I learned Assembler 

Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - Weirdware

[Martin Packer]

I wonder if specifying this leads to compilers doing (optimised) 
tail-recursion - where appropriate.

Cheers, Martin

Martin Packer

zChampion, Systems Investigator & Performance Troubleshooter, IBM

+44-7802-245-584

email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com

Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker

Blog: 
https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker

Podcast Series (With Marna Walle): https://developer.ibm.com/tv/mpt/or 
  
https://itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/mainframe-performance-topics/id1127943573?mt=2


Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCu_65HaYgksbF6Q8SQ4oOvA



From:   David Crayford 
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Date:   08/04/2020 09:38
Subject:[EXTERNAL] Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize 
key applications? - Weirdware
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List 



*RECURSIVE*
An optional clause that allows COBOL programs to be recursively
reentered.

You can specify the RECURSIVE clause only on the outermost program
of a compilation unit. Recursive programs cannot contain nested
subprograms.

If the RECURSIVE clause is specified, program-name can be
recursively reentered while a previous invocation is still active.
If the RECURSIVE clause is not specified, an active program cannot
be recursively reentered.

On 2020-04-08 4:09 PM, Mike Schwab wrote:
> PROGRAM-ID pgmname RECURSIVE.
>
> 
https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/en/SS6SG3_4.2.0/com.ibm.entcobol.doc_4.2/PGandLR/tasks/tpsubw03.htm

>
> On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 9:47 PM Seymour J Metz  wrote:
>> Maybe,but there's nothing in his example to suggest that COBOL supports 
recursion; you'd have to check the documentation.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
>> 
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__mason.gmu.edu_-7Esmetz3=DwICaQ=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg=BsPGKdq7-Vl8MW2-WOWZjlZ0NwmcFSpQCLphNznBSDQ=vApB8Pw9Cu4OwyYrwyWnJybkrmVmizS30iIud0_La7E=_ADEInxU_xV_FnsM-OM-2gGrrNOmBgyVWSRzVJfZkSw=
 

>>
>> 
>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on 
behalf of David Crayford [dcrayf...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 9:44 PM
>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
>> Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? 
- Weirdware
>>
>> Wow, and some people criticize Java for being verbose!
>>
>> So using nested programs one can implement recursion in COBOL which you
>> couldn't do before without using a table stack.
>>
>> On 2020-04-08 5:14 AM, Frank Swarbrick wrote:
>>> Nested subroutines.
>>>
>>> Small example:
>>>
>>>ID DIVISION.
>>>PROGRAM-NAME. MAINPROG.
>>>[...]
>>>PROCEDURE DIVISION.
>>>CALL 'NESTED-PROGRAM-1'
>>>GOBACK.
>>>
>>>ID DIVISION.
>>>PROGRAM-ID. NESTED-PROGRAM-1.
>>>DATA DIVISION.
>>>WORKING-STORAGE SECTION.
>>>01  LOCAL-VAR-1 PIC X.
>>>[...]
>>>PROCEDURE DIVISION.
>>>DISPLAY 'IN NESTED-PROGRAM-1'
>>>GOBACK.
>>>
>>>END PROGRAM NESTED-PROGRAM-1.
>>>
>>>END PROGRAM MAINPROG.
>>>
>>> 
>>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on 
behalf of David Spiegel 
>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 2:58 PM
>>> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
>>> Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key 
applications? - Weirdware
>>>
>>> Hi Frank,
>>> Thank you for that information.
>>> (All the COBOL I support(ed) didn't contain these and neither did my
>>> university courses in the '70s.)
>>>
>>> If I wanted to look them up, which keyword(s) would I use?
>>>
>>> Thanks and regards,
>>> David
>>>
>>> On 2020-04-07 15:49, Frank Swarbrick wrote:
 Internal subroutines and local variables have been supported since 
COBOL 1985 (VS COBOL II era).
 They're not ideal, but they do exist.

 
 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on 
behalf of David Spiegel 
 Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 12:58 PM
 To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
 Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key 
applications? - Weirdware

 How about no internal subroutines with local variables?

 On 2020-04-07 14:47, Bob Bridges wrote:
> I used to bad-mouth COBOL, and I still prefer languages that are 
less wordy.  But I came somewhat reluctantly to see that it has its 
strengths.  The one I think most important is that it encourages even 
novice programmers to organize their logic in what we used to call a 
"top-down" manner:  This paragraph accomplish a certain task by executing 
paragraphs one through three, then two more, and this subparagraph 
executes subsubparagraphs, and so on.  Forms good habits, I think.
>
> ---
> Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313
>
> /* My life is in the hands of any fool who can make me lose my 
temper.  -driving motto */
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List 

Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - Weirdware

[David Crayford]

*RECURSIVE*
   An optional clause that allows COBOL programs to be recursively
   reentered.

   You can specify the RECURSIVE clause only on the outermost program
   of a compilation unit. Recursive programs cannot contain nested
   subprograms.

   If the RECURSIVE clause is specified, program-name can be
   recursively reentered while a previous invocation is still active.
   If the RECURSIVE clause is not specified, an active program cannot
   be recursively reentered.

On 2020-04-08 4:09 PM, Mike Schwab wrote:

PROGRAM-ID pgmname RECURSIVE.

https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/en/SS6SG3_4.2.0/com.ibm.entcobol.doc_4.2/PGandLR/tasks/tpsubw03.htm

On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 9:47 PM Seymour J Metz  wrote:

Maybe,but there's nothing in his example to suggest that COBOL supports 
recursion; you'd have to check the documentation.


--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
David Crayford [dcrayf...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 9:44 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - 
Weirdware

Wow, and some people criticize Java for being verbose!

So using nested programs one can implement recursion in COBOL which you
couldn't do before without using a table stack.

On 2020-04-08 5:14 AM, Frank Swarbrick wrote:

Nested subroutines.

Small example:

   ID DIVISION.
   PROGRAM-NAME. MAINPROG.
   [...]
   PROCEDURE DIVISION.
   CALL 'NESTED-PROGRAM-1'
   GOBACK.

   ID DIVISION.
   PROGRAM-ID. NESTED-PROGRAM-1.
   DATA DIVISION.
   WORKING-STORAGE SECTION.
   01  LOCAL-VAR-1 PIC X.
   [...]
   PROCEDURE DIVISION.
   DISPLAY 'IN NESTED-PROGRAM-1'
   GOBACK.

   END PROGRAM NESTED-PROGRAM-1.

   END PROGRAM MAINPROG.


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of David 
Spiegel 
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 2:58 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - 
Weirdware

Hi Frank,
Thank you for that information.
(All the COBOL I support(ed) didn't contain these and neither did my
university courses in the '70s.)

If I wanted to look them up, which keyword(s) would I use?

Thanks and regards,
David

On 2020-04-07 15:49, Frank Swarbrick wrote:

Internal subroutines and local variables have been supported since COBOL 1985 
(VS COBOL II era).
They're not ideal, but they do exist.


From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of David 
Spiegel 
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 12:58 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - 
Weirdware

How about no internal subroutines with local variables?

On 2020-04-07 14:47, Bob Bridges wrote:

I used to bad-mouth COBOL, and I still prefer languages that are less wordy.  But I came 
somewhat reluctantly to see that it has its strengths.  The one I think most important is 
that it encourages even novice programmers to organize their logic in what we used to 
call a "top-down" manner:  This paragraph accomplish a certain task by 
executing paragraphs one through three, then two more, and this subparagraph executes 
subsubparagraphs, and so on.  Forms good habits, I think.

---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313

/* My life is in the hands of any fool who can make me lose my temper.  
-driving motto */

-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf 
Of scott Ford
Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 12:55

I learned Assembler first and then Cobol and then some PL/1.  I always felt 
each language had its strengths and weaknesses and all were like tools in a 
toolbox.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
.

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access 

Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - Weirdware

[Mike Schwab]

PROGRAM-ID pgmname RECURSIVE.

https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/en/SS6SG3_4.2.0/com.ibm.entcobol.doc_4.2/PGandLR/tasks/tpsubw03.htm

On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 9:47 PM Seymour J Metz  wrote:
>
> Maybe,but there's nothing in his example to suggest that COBOL supports 
> recursion; you'd have to check the documentation.
>
>
> --
> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
>
> 
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of 
> David Crayford [dcrayf...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 9:44 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - 
> Weirdware
>
> Wow, and some people criticize Java for being verbose!
>
> So using nested programs one can implement recursion in COBOL which you
> couldn't do before without using a table stack.
>
> On 2020-04-08 5:14 AM, Frank Swarbrick wrote:
> > Nested subroutines.
> >
> > Small example:
> >
> >   ID DIVISION.
> >   PROGRAM-NAME. MAINPROG.
> >   [...]
> >   PROCEDURE DIVISION.
> >   CALL 'NESTED-PROGRAM-1'
> >   GOBACK.
> >
> >   ID DIVISION.
> >   PROGRAM-ID. NESTED-PROGRAM-1.
> >   DATA DIVISION.
> >   WORKING-STORAGE SECTION.
> >   01  LOCAL-VAR-1 PIC X.
> >   [...]
> >   PROCEDURE DIVISION.
> >   DISPLAY 'IN NESTED-PROGRAM-1'
> >   GOBACK.
> >
> >   END PROGRAM NESTED-PROGRAM-1.
> >
> >   END PROGRAM MAINPROG.
> >
> > 
> > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf of 
> > David Spiegel 
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 2:58 PM
> > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
> > Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - 
> > Weirdware
> >
> > Hi Frank,
> > Thank you for that information.
> > (All the COBOL I support(ed) didn't contain these and neither did my
> > university courses in the '70s.)
> >
> > If I wanted to look them up, which keyword(s) would I use?
> >
> > Thanks and regards,
> > David
> >
> > On 2020-04-07 15:49, Frank Swarbrick wrote:
> >> Internal subroutines and local variables have been supported since COBOL 
> >> 1985 (VS COBOL II era).
> >> They're not ideal, but they do exist.
> >>
> >> 
> >> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List  on behalf 
> >> of David Spiegel 
> >> Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 12:58 PM
> >> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU 
> >> Subject: Re: Why rip out COBOL when you can modernize key applications? - 
> >> Weirdware
> >>
> >> How about no internal subroutines with local variables?
> >>
> >> On 2020-04-07 14:47, Bob Bridges wrote:
> >>> I used to bad-mouth COBOL, and I still prefer languages that are less 
> >>> wordy.  But I came somewhat reluctantly to see that it has its strengths. 
> >>>  The one I think most important is that it encourages even novice 
> >>> programmers to organize their logic in what we used to call a "top-down" 
> >>> manner:  This paragraph accomplish a certain task by executing paragraphs 
> >>> one through three, then two more, and this subparagraph executes 
> >>> subsubparagraphs, and so on.  Forms good habits, I think.
> >>>
> >>> ---
> >>> Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313
> >>>
> >>> /* My life is in the hands of any fool who can make me lose my temper.  
> >>> -driving motto */
> >>>
> >>> -Original Message-
> >>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On 
> >>> Behalf Of scott Ford
> >>> Sent: Tuesday, April 7, 2020 12:55
> >>>
> >>> I learned Assembler first and then Cobol and then some PL/1.  I always 
> >>> felt each language had its strengths and weaknesses and all were like 
> >>> tools in a toolbox.
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> >>> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
> >>> .
> >> --
> >> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> >> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
> >>
> >> --
> >> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> >> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
> >> .
> > --
> > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
> >
> > --
> > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
>
> --
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to