May 31, 2023 at 2:08 am
So can anyone say have they turned the old Model-T into a futuristic hover car or at least a hybrid?
No. But consider that the Model-T still does exactly what it was designed to do. 😉 If that's all you need, an existing Model-T will do.
But, I do agree with the connotation implied by the "Churchill Downs" comment. 😀
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
May 31, 2023 at 3:21 am
Okay educate me -- what is Churchill Downs -- sounds like something happening in merry ole England but COBOL was created in down home America.
May 31, 2023 at 12:32 pm
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please follow Best Practices For Posting On Forums to receive quicker and higher quality responses
May 31, 2023 at 1:02 pm
I have been watching this conversation about COBOL - and I find it to be rather funny. I started working in this industry on a little known platform called MUMPS even though that platform was (and still is) running a majority of health care systems across the world.
Just because the platform and language are old - does not mean the platform and language haven't been upgraded and updated to meet current demands. I know for a fact that the old MUMPS platforms have been upgraded and improved to a point where not only are they competitive with current technologies, but often can beat the so-called latest and greatest offerings.
COBOL is no different and is barely older than Oracle and SQL Server.
I STILL have to write code in Mumps from time to time.
Michael L John
If you assassinate a DBA, would you pull a trigger?
To properly post on a forum:
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/61537/
May 31, 2023 at 2:07 pm
If you ever had to deal with Assembler then COBOL would look like the futuristic flying car. When I was in college they taught us both Assembler and COBOL. I had to use both early in my career. I even had to convert an Assembler program to COBOL because there wasn't many of us that knew it. Now Assembler is a dinosaur, 1947 I believe. I have great empathy for anyone who would have to deal with that language now. How about some BASIC code? Who remembers that? But COBOL again looks futuristic compared to BASIC. IMHO
-------------------------------------------------------------
we travel not to escape life but for life not to escape us
Don't fear failure, fear regret.
May 31, 2023 at 2:26 pm
Sure COBOL had about a 12 year head start on C (1959ish versus 1972ish) but I would find it hard to be convinced that anything written in the 1973 COBOL could not have been written better in 1973 C with both the human interface efficiency upgrade and machine processing efficiency upgrade. So yeah, they should have just chopped off the OBOL and gone full C, starting way back in 1973 (aka 50 years ago).
OK. Let's both write a report with control breaks. I'll do it in COBOL ... in an hour or so. (Good COBOL programmers had templates for each major type of program and would start from that.) Your C program will take days (and will still have bugs in it).
COBOL, when written properly (structured and following best-practice rules, such as separate paragraphs for I/O), is also the most maintainable language.
One huge advantage COBOL also had was that you could move any data as just bytes (using a GROUP level number), whereas generally in other languages each char / numeric / binary value would have to be moved separately.
SQL DBA,SQL Server MVP(07, 08, 09) "It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I'm wearing Milk-Bone underwear." "Norm", on "Cheers". Also from "Cheers", from "Carla": "You need to know 3 things about Tortelli men: Tortelli men draw women like flies; Tortelli men treat women like flies; Tortelli men's brains are in their flies".
May 31, 2023 at 2:33 pm
If you ever had to deal with Assembler then COBOL would look like the futuristic flying car. When I was in college they taught us both Assembler and COBOL. I had to use both early in my career. I even had to convert an Assembler program to COBOL because there wasn't many of us that knew it. Now Assembler is a dinosaur, 1947 I believe. I have great empathy for anyone who would have to deal with that language now. How about some BASIC code? Who remembers that? But COBOL again looks futuristic compared to BASIC. IMHO
While it's amusing to think of COBOL as futuristic, it's important to note that both COBOL and assembler have gracefully aged into the realm of "outdated". They are both vintage artefacts in the ever-evolving world of technology. Put it this way: if programming languages were superheroes, COBOL would be Captain Nostalgia, and assembler would be The Ancient Coder. They might have once ruled the computing world, but now they're just sitting in a retirement home, reminiscing about the good old days of punch cards and magnetic tapes. So, while it's fun to appreciate their historical significance, it's safe to say that we've moved on to newer and more exciting languages that are better suited for the challenges of today. Time marches on, and so does technology!
May 31, 2023 at 2:33 pm
Yep Assembler was a chore, did you do data cards as well? BASIC was a better human interface than COBOL but then again that would greatly depend upon the flavor of BASIC. I think I learned at least 5 different forms of BASIC and my foggy remembrance of them is that they were pretty much like Pascal, yes you still had to use GOTOs in BASIC but if you were careful you could minimize those greatly. I think the only language I did not learn was machine code, and I cannot imagine having to code in that language and yet there were folks that did it and did it very well.
Note again please do not get me wrong, I do not despise COBOL. In fact, I tip my hat to its inventor as it was, as you say, the futuristic flying car of its day. However like Assembler, there are much better vehicles now as well as 50 years ago. In fact C can be as fast or faster than Assembler and I think this is partially because of highly advanced compilers for C.
May 31, 2023 at 2:39 pm
In fact C can be as fast or faster than Assembler and I think this is partially because of highly advanced compilers for C.
As C compiles into an Assembly File it can't be faster than Assembler, at best the same.
Assembly instructions are the instructions on the CPU.
May 31, 2023 at 2:48 pm
OK. Let's both write a report with control breaks. I'll do it in COBOL ... in an hour or so. (Good COBOL programmers had templates for each major type of program and would start from that.) Your C program will take days (and will still have bugs in it).
COBOL, when written properly (structured and following best-practice rules, such as separate paragraphs for I/O), is also the most maintainable language.
One huge advantage COBOL also had was that you could move any data as just bytes (using a GROUP level number), whereas generally in other languages each char / numeric / binary value would have to be moved separately.
The advantages you point out are nothing that is intrinsic to COBOL all languages if properly formatted are just as easy to maintain as COBOL, they just require a lot less lines of code to do the same thing.
As for the challenge, to be fair, you would have to write it from scratch using no templates at all because if you get to use templates then I get to use libraries and I can guarantee you I can write that report in less than an hour without bugs if I use libraries.
Further with the right libraries C can manipulate data in numerous ways including Bytes or Words or Blobs.
As for structure, again properly formatted C is a well defined in form and is just as easily maintained as any other properly formatted code.
Heck SQL can be a nightmare if it is horrible formatted or not formatted at all. I know this as I am having to clean up some very badly formatted SQL and remove their hidden bugs because no one could see them as the lack of formatting made them next to impossible to see. I am also writting SQL Formatting and Coding Standards for our team. Which sadly is I think the seventh group of programmers that I have had to write Standards for. I am not sure why coding groups choose not to implement group Standards but it is the first thing I ask to see when joining a team. As code with group Standards can be easily maintained by all the programmers on the team.
May 31, 2023 at 2:53 pm
As C compiles into an Assembly File it can't be faster than Assembler, at best the same.
Assembly instructions are the instructions on the CPU.
Johnathan that was not my claim, that was a claim by someone much more knowledgeable than I and they had facts to back up their claim. I would share the article with you but that would require me stumbling across it once more. I had the same initial opinion that you have, but facts are facts.
Further let me ask you if all languages are compiled into Assembly and thus as you say the same. Why then if you have a need for speed you should use Assembler or C to code that in?
May 31, 2023 at 3:04 pm
This was removed by the editor as SPAM
May 31, 2023 at 3:06 pm
ScottPletcher wrote:OK. Let's both write a report with control breaks. I'll do it in COBOL ... in an hour or so. (Good COBOL programmers had templates for each major type of program and would start from that.) Your C program will take days (and will still have bugs in it).
COBOL, when written properly (structured and following best-practice rules, such as separate paragraphs for I/O), is also the most maintainable language.
One huge advantage COBOL also had was that you could move any data as just bytes (using a GROUP level number), whereas generally in other languages each char / numeric / binary value would have to be moved separately.
The advantages you point out are nothing that is intrinsic to COBOL all languages if properly formatted are just as easy to maintain as COBOL, they just require a lot less lines of code to do the same thing.
As for the challenge, to be fair, you would have to write it from scratch using no templates at all because if you get to use templates then I get to use libraries and I can guarantee you I can write that report in less than an hour without bugs if I use libraries.
Further with the right libraries C can manipulate data in numerous ways including Bytes or Words or Blobs.
As for structure, again properly formatted C is a well defined in form and is just as easily maintained as any other properly formatted code.
Heck SQL can be a nightmare if it is horrible formatted or not formatted at all. I know this as I am having to clean up some very badly formatted SQL and remove their hidden bugs because no one could see them as the lack of formatting made them next to impossible to see. I am also writting SQL Formatting and Coding Standards for our team. Which sadly is I think the seventh group of programmers that I have had to write Standards for. I am not sure why coding groups choose not to implement group Standards but it is the first thing I ask to see when joining a team. As code with group Standards can be easily maintained by all the programmers on the team.
ScottPletcher wrote:OK. Let's both write a report with control breaks. I'll do it in COBOL ... in an hour or so. (Good COBOL programmers had templates for each major type of program and would start from that.) Your C program will take days (and will still have bugs in it).
COBOL, when written properly (structured and following best-practice rules, such as separate paragraphs for I/O), is also the most maintainable language.
One huge advantage COBOL also had was that you could move any data as just bytes (using a GROUP level number), whereas generally in other languages each char / numeric / binary value would have to be moved separately.
The advantages you point out are nothing that is intrinsic to COBOL all languages if properly formatted are just as easy to maintain as COBOL, they just require a lot less lines of code to do the same thing.
As for the challenge, to be fair, you would have to write it from scratch using no templates at all because if you get to use templates then I get to use libraries and I can guarantee you I can write that report in less than an hour without bugs if I use libraries.
Further with the right libraries C can manipulate data in numerous ways including Bytes or Words or Blobs.
As for structure, again properly formatted C is a well defined in form and is just as easily maintained as any other properly formatted code.
Heck SQL can be a nightmare if it is horrible formatted or not formatted at all. I know this as I am having to clean up some very badly formatted SQL and remove their hidden bugs because no one could see them as the lack of formatting made them next to impossible to see. I am also writting SQL Formatting and Coding Standards for our team. Which sadly is I think the seventh group of programmers that I have had to write Standards for. I am not sure why coding groups choose not to implement group Standards but it is the first thing I ask to see when joining a team. As code with group Standards can be easily maintained by all the programmers on the team.
Use any libraries you want, they won't help you all that much. Let's see your C program for the report with control breaks, no chance it takes "less than an hour". C is not designed for reports, COBOL is. I guess you're not familiar with report writer. It's literally just a few lines of procedure code to generate a complex report.
SQL DBA,SQL Server MVP(07, 08, 09) "It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I'm wearing Milk-Bone underwear." "Norm", on "Cheers". Also from "Cheers", from "Carla": "You need to know 3 things about Tortelli men: Tortelli men draw women like flies; Tortelli men treat women like flies; Tortelli men's brains are in their flies".
May 31, 2023 at 3:10 pm
This was removed by the editor as SPAM
May 31, 2023 at 3:13 pm
This was removed by the editor as SPAM
Viewing 15 posts - 66,376 through 66,390 (of 66,708 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply