arnold2@violet.berkeley.edu (mchawi) (06/05/88)
now that there are c compilers on big ibms, is there a rush of COBOL->C?...
doit@altger.UUCP (Christian Rohrmueller) (06/14/88)
In article <10565@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> arnold2@violet.berkeley.edu (mchawi) writes: >now that there are c compilers on big ibms, is there a rush of COBOL->C?... Yes. It's from RAPITECH SYSTEMS INC. in Suffern , NY 10901 Montebello Corporate Park. I've never worked with it. Just got some information materials. Hope that helps, Christian
ubiquity@cs.utexas.edu (Richard Hoffman) (06/16/88)
In article <768@altger.UUCP>, doit@altger.UUCP (Christian Rohrmueller) writes: > In article <10565@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> arnold2@violet.berkeley.edu (mchawi) writes: > >now that there are c compilers on big ibms, is there a rush of COBOL->C?... > > Yes. It's from RAPITECH SYSTEMS INC. in Suffern , NY 10901 > Montebello Corporate Park. I think he meant "are a lot of shops trying to convert from COBOL to C?" rather than "are there COBOL->C conversion tools?". If so, from what I have seen in the Oil Industry, the answer is Zip. The big conversion contraversy is whether to go from COBOL to PL/I. Not only are there a lot of COBOL programs out there, there are a lot of COBOL programmers out there, who have little interest in learning C and whose managers have little interest in paying them to do it. Another problem is that most COBOL programs depend on data types such as zoned and packed decimal, which are not typically available in C. As far as automatic conversion goes, I would think that, with the addition of some packed decimal typedefs and conversion routines, COBOL->C could be completely automated. The results would make pretty awful reading, though. -- Richard Hoffman / 5751 Valkeith / Houston, TX 77096 / (713) 729-5716 +- / 12166 Metric Blvd., #122 / Austin, TX 78757 / (512) 823-1822 "Malt does more than Milton can / To justify God's ways to Man." -- ??
Chuck_M_Grandgent@cup.portal.com (06/17/88)
Having been a manager presiding over a group of software development folk used to COBOL for years, who were somewhat suddently thrown onto a UNIX-based development platform, I'd like to throw my two cents in. My first exposure to COBOL was 12 years ago in college. I hated COBOL so much I flunked it the first time. However over many years I grew to appreciate its strengths in several areas: 1) excellent file handling capabilities, unmatched by any other language I've encountered 2) excellent self-documenting characteristics due to its English-like verbosity. On a System-V platform, we went for Microfocus COBOL, which I would recommend. What we DID do, was to port a couple MSDOS "C" libraries to UNIX and then call them from the COBOL. This was seen to be a nice situation. The libraries did handy data and date/time conversion stuff, and would've been a pain in COBOL. The consensus grew to be that a nice combination of "C" and COBOL got along real well together.
rbj@cmr.icst.nbs.gov (Root Boy Jim) (06/24/88)
? From: Chuck_M_Grandgent@cup.portal.com ? However over many years I grew ? to appreciate its strengths in several areas: 1) excellent file handling ? capabilities, unmatched by any other language I've encountered ? 2) excellent self-documenting characteristics due to its English-like ? verbosity. I keep telling people that COBOL is a better language than FORTRAN. Add to that list 3) good data structuring and 4) nice formatting. (Root Boy) Jim Cottrell <rbj@icst-cmr.arpa> National Bureau of Standards Flamer's Hotline: (301) 975-5688 The opinions expressed are solely my own and do not reflect NBS policy or agreement Careful with that VAX Eugene!
PAAAAAR%CALSTATE.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu (06/28/88)
Both (Root Boy) Jim Cottrell <rbj@icst-cmr.arpa>
and Chuck_M_Grandgent@cup.portal.com
have recently had the courage to praise COBOL.
I agree with them. COBOL and Cwere both developed by programmers for p
programmers. Both have more in them than meets the eye. Both have
short hand ways of saying things -- I like
SORT FILE
and
05 WAGES PIC $*(7).V99.
for example in COBOL
as much as I like
while (*p++=*q++)
/* if I got it right!*/
or even MOVE Q TO P
No that must be wrong, its shorter than the above,
its the same length as strcpy(p,q)
and does more...
Another odd thing about the two languages,
both C and COBOL have been used for operating systems and compilers!
Trouble is many people don't learn clever COBOL.
Try
IF A AND B AND C > 0 SET P UP BY 1
ELSE..... .
or
splitting the cents and dollars up in a field containing money.
And most important of all -- how do you do exact decimal arithmetic on money
in any language accept COBOL?
(Personally I don't want my wages suffering floating point round off:-)
Dick Botting
PAAAAAR@CCS.CSUSCC.CALSTATE(doc-dick)
paaaaar@calstate.bitnet
PAAAAAR%CALSTATE.BITNET@{depends on the phase of the moon}.EDU
Dept Comp Sci., CSUSB, 5500 State Univ Pkway, San Bernardino CA 92407
Disclaimer: I am an only an egggallen@apollo.uucp (Gary Allen) (06/30/88)
In article <16316@brl-adm.ARPA> PAAAAAR%CALSTATE.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu writes: >Both (Root Boy) Jim Cottrell <rbj@icst-cmr.arpa> >and Chuck_M_Grandgent@cup.portal.com >have recently had the courage to praise COBOL. > >I agree with them. COBOL and Cwere both developed by programmers for p [......] If COBOL (or for that matter BASIC or FORTRAN) is the answer, I really don't have any interest in the question!! What a snob, huh? [......] >both C and COBOL have been used for operating systems and compilers! ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Let me guess, A reverse Polish BASIC interpreter with 80 column input on punched cards, right? >Trouble is many people don't learn clever COBOL. ^^^^^^^^^^^^ Oxymoronic!! [.....] >splitting the cents and dollars up in a field containing money. > >And most important of all -- how do you do exact decimal arithmetic on money >in any language accept COBOL? Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. Programming languages are tools; a particular tool is for a particular purpose. No carpenter would argue that his hammer was as good as his power saw. >(Personally I don't want my wages suffering floating point round off:-) Neither do I, but accountants have no need for self-documenting device drivers :-) >Dick Botting Gary Allen Apollo Computer Chelmsford, MA {decvax,yale,umix}!apollo!gallen "Even the finest shoe makes a terrible hat" -- Japanese proverb from Bartlett's.
gph@hpsemc.HP.COM (Migration Engineer) (07/01/88)
gallen@apollo.uucp (Gary Allen) writes: ->In article <16316@brl-adm.ARPA> PAAAAAR%CALSTATE.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu writes: ->>Both (Root Boy) Jim Cottrell <rbj@icst-cmr.arpa> ->>and Chuck_M_Grandgent@cup.portal.com ->>have recently had the courage to praise COBOL. ->> ->>I agree with them. COBOL and Cwere both developed by programmers for p ->[......] ->If COBOL (or for that matter BASIC or FORTRAN) is the answer, I really ->don't have any interest in the question!! What a snob, huh? ->[......] -->>>both C and COBOL have been used for operating systems and compilers! ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ->Let me guess, A reverse Polish BASIC interpreter with 80 column input ->on punched cards, right? ->>Trouble is many people don't learn clever COBOL. ^^^^^^^^^^^^ Oxymoronic!! etc. Gary, you made you point, and I agree with it. COBOL and C are designed for different purposes. However, your response is rude and obnoxious. Didn't your parents teach you any manners? Do you think the rest of us enjoy reading material like the above? I don't. I also don't see why a discussion about compilers has to turn into an emotional temper tantrum. - gph