Speaking of COBOL ...

Discussion in 'Ruby' started by M. Edward (Ed) Borasky, Oct 14, 2006.

  1. M. Edward (Ed) Borasky, Oct 14, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. M. Edward (Ed) Borasky

    Andrew Libby Guest

    My guess is that the need to use COBOL has to do with the
    present investment these companies have in systems already.
    I highly doubt that organizations that are newish are using
    it (or if they are it's minor in comparison to older orgs).

    Now, I do think that a translator would be super cool though.

    Andy



    M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:
    > Interesting article on the future of COBOL ... perhaps a COBOL to Ruby
    > translator would ease some pain?
    >
    > http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=266228
    >
    >


    --
    Andrew Libby
    Tangeis, LLC
    Innovative IT Management Solutions
     
    Andrew Libby, Oct 14, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Andrew Libby wrote:
    >
    > My guess is that the need to use COBOL has to do with the present
    > investment these companies have in systems already.
    > I highly doubt that organizations that are newish are using it (or if
    > they are it's minor in comparison to older orgs).
    >
    > Now, I do think that a translator would be super cool though.
    >
    > Andy
    >
    >
    >
    > M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:
    >> Interesting article on the future of COBOL ... perhaps a COBOL to Ruby
    >> translator would ease some pain?
    >>
    >> http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=266228
    >>
    >>
    >>

    >

    A COBOL refactoring IDE written in Ruby! Sounds to me like
    meta-programming at its finest. At one point long ago, I thought it
    would be a good idea to learn COBOL, but I gave up on it and stayed with
    FORTRAN and assembler. Then all kinds of interesting things happened,
    like character sets including lower case, the Cuban Missile Crisis,
    System\360, and the Vietnam War. Maybe now is a good time to take up
    COBOL again. :)

    Could you say COBOL is a domain-specific language for maintaining COBOL
    legacy code?

    <ducking>
     
    M. Edward (Ed) Borasky, Oct 14, 2006
    #3
  4. On Sun, 15 Oct 2006, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:

    > A COBOL refactoring IDE written in Ruby! Sounds to me like
    > meta-programming at its finest. At one point long ago, I thought it
    > would be a good idea to learn COBOL, but I gave up on it and stayed with
    > FORTRAN and assembler. Then all kinds of interesting things happened,
    > like character sets including lower case, the Cuban Missile Crisis,
    > System\360, and the Vietnam War. Maybe now is a good time to take up
    > COBOL again. :)
    >
    > Could you say COBOL is a domain-specific language for maintaining COBOL
    > legacy code?


    Don't dismiss all of the ideas in COBOL so quickly. For decades it has
    been the only mainstream language to do decimal arithmatic. It also has
    some excellent page formatting capabilities, also missing from mainstream
    languages.

    All of this can easily be done in Ruby, unlike many other languages.

    -- Matt
    It's not what I know that counts.
    It's what I can remember in time to use.
     
    Matt Lawrence, Oct 14, 2006
    #4
  5. Matt Lawrence wrote:
    > On Sun, 15 Oct 2006, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:
    >
    >> A COBOL refactoring IDE written in Ruby! Sounds to me like
    >> meta-programming at its finest. At one point long ago, I thought it
    >> would be a good idea to learn COBOL, but I gave up on it and stayed with
    >> FORTRAN and assembler. Then all kinds of interesting things happened,
    >> like character sets including lower case, the Cuban Missile Crisis,
    >> System\360, and the Vietnam War. Maybe now is a good time to take up
    >> COBOL again. :)
    >>
    >> Could you say COBOL is a domain-specific language for maintaining COBOL
    >> legacy code?

    >
    > Don't dismiss all of the ideas in COBOL so quickly. For decades it has
    > been the only mainstream language to do decimal arithmatic. It also has
    > some excellent page formatting capabilities, also missing from
    > mainstream languages.
    >
    > All of this can easily be done in Ruby, unlike many other languages.


    Ah ... so Ruby is not mainstream? Perhaps an ability to refactor legacy
    COBOL will make it mainstream in spades!!

    I always wondered why decimal arithmetic was built in to microprocessors
    from day one, while floating point was added only later. Now I know ...
    more COBOL legacy code than FORTRAN legacy code. :)

    Page formatting? Isn't that built into Perl, which I think is
    "mainstream"? "Practical Extraction and *Reporting* Language", right?
     
    M. Edward (Ed) Borasky, Oct 14, 2006
    #5
  6. On Sun, 15 Oct 2006, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:

    > Ah ... so Ruby is not mainstream? Perhaps an ability to refactor legacy
    > COBOL will make it mainstream in spades!!


    Ruby is just starting to become mainstream. There are still a lot of
    computer people who haven't even heard of it.

    > Page formatting? Isn't that built into Perl, which I think is
    > "mainstream"? "Practical Extraction and *Reporting* Language", right?


    Page formatting in Perl is nowhere near as powerful and easy to use as
    what is provided in COBOL. I don't know many perl programmers who use it
    regularly.

    -- Matt
    It's not what I know that counts.
    It's what I can remember in time to use.
     
    Matt Lawrence, Oct 14, 2006
    #6
  7. Matt Lawrence wrote:
    > Don't dismiss all of the ideas in COBOL so quickly. For decades it has
    > been the only mainstream language to do decimal arithmatic.


    PL/I, RPG, and Ada from Ada 95 on. And they all avoided the horrible
    botch in COBOL's precision handling that was not fixed until COBOL 2002
    (and is still only optionally fixed).

    --
    John W. Kennedy
    "The blind rulers of Logres
    Nourished the land on a fallacy of rational virtue."
    -- Charles Williams. "Taliessin through Logres: Prelude"
     
    John W. Kennedy, Oct 15, 2006
    #7
  8. M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:
    > I always wondered why decimal arithmetic was built in to microprocessors
    > from day one, while floating point was added only later.


    Actually, no. Decimal arithmetic in microprocessors goes back to the
    original market that Intel invented microprocessors for in the first
    place -- desk calculators.

    --
    John W. Kennedy
    "The blind rulers of Logres
    Nourished the land on a fallacy of rational virtue."
    -- Charles Williams. "Taliessin through Logres: Prelude"
     
    John W. Kennedy, Oct 15, 2006
    #8
  9. On 10/14/06, John W. Kennedy <> wrote:
    > Matt Lawrence wrote:
    > > Don't dismiss all of the ideas in COBOL so quickly. For decades it has
    > > been the only mainstream language to do decimal arithmatic.

    >
    > PL/I, RPG, and Ada from Ada 95 on.


    Not to mention quite a few implementations of SQL. Certainly a
    mainstream language albeit not a full programming language.

    --
    Rick DeNatale

    My blog on Ruby
    http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/
     
    Rick DeNatale, Oct 15, 2006
    #9
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Ferro
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    14,529
    Dave Monroe
    Oct 29, 2003
  2. SK
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    1,579
    jan V
    Aug 9, 2005
  3. knorth
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    367
    knorth
    Sep 13, 2005
  4. awosy
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    758
    Thomas Weidenfeller
    Apr 28, 2006
  5. Kalpana Shridhar
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    878
Loading...

Share This Page