COBOL versus Lisp
mik...@ziplip.com
What do you like more: COBOL or Lisp ?
Espen Vestre
> BEING THE HASH-VALUES OF
>
> What do you like more: COBOL or Lisp ?
ROTFL :-)
I must admit that while I'm one of those old-timers that have actually
gotten fond of LOOP (to the extent that I'm no longer able to write
DO/DO*- loops without looking up examples or in the manual), I have
big problems remembering the syntax of the hash iteration
constructs... so I use maphash whenever I can...
--
(espen)
Kenny Tilton
mik...@ziplip.com wrote:
> BEING THE HASH-VALUES OF
>
> What do you like more: COBOL or Lisp ?
I am a huge fan of COBOL. Evaluate, move-corresponding,
coply...replacing, condition names, transparent conversion between
numeric and even alphanumeric types. perform..varying..from...until.
But stop being mean to it by comparing it to a language like Lisp. COBOL
had its day, but you better start studying Lisp (and stop running around
trying to irritate people) or you won't be ready when Lisp has its.
--
kenny tilton
clinisys, inc
http://www.tilton-technology.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------
"Everything is a cell." -- Alan Kay
Steven M. Haflich
> But stop being mean to it by comparing it to a language like Lisp. COBOL
> had its day, but you better start studying Lisp (and stop running around
> trying to irritate people) or you won't be ready when Lisp has its.
There is still a warm spot for COBOL in my heart, or perhaps somewhat lower
down, from 30 years ago where COBOL programming paid for music school.
(Yes, I already knew Lisp back then.)
But lest members of c.l.l think that COBOL is the same language it was
30-40 years ago, be aware that COBOL is _still_ under active development
and the community reacts appropriately to the demands of new technology.
INCITS/J4 is a sibling committee to INCITS/J13, and they have active
projects. See http://www.cobolstandards.com/ . IIRC O-O programming
was added to COBOL some years ago, and language bindings to XML are
underway.
I'm certainly not going to endorse COBOL as a modern programming language,
but it may not be quite the dinosaur everyong imagines it is.
Kenny Tilton
Steven M. Haflich wrote:
> Kenny Tilton wrote:
>
>> But stop being mean to it by comparing it to a language like Lisp.
>> COBOL had its day, but you better start studying Lisp (and stop
>> running around trying to irritate people) or you won't be ready when
>> Lisp has its.
>
>
> There is still a warm spot for COBOL in my heart, or perhaps somewhat
lower
> down, from 30 years ago where COBOL programming paid for music school.
> (Yes, I already knew Lisp back then.)
>
> But lest members of c.l.l think that COBOL is the same language it was
> 30-40 years ago, ...
Oh, no, I looked at the Object Division when it came out. :)
You know, if the Java crowd is looking for a language for the masses...
why not?
kt
Bob Bane
>
> But lest members of c.l.l think that COBOL is the same language it was
> 30-40 years ago, be aware that COBOL is _still_ under active development
> and the community reacts appropriately to the demands of new technology.
> INCITS/J4 is a sibling committee to INCITS/J13, and they have active
> projects. See http://www.cobolstandards.com/ . IIRC O-O programming
> was added to COBOL some years ago, and language bindings to XML are
> underway.
>
I suppose it had to happen someday - the combination of the most verbose
popular programming language and the most verbose popular data
interchange format.
Is this being secretly promoted by the RSI for Mainframe Programmers
Society?
- Bob
Matthias
> But lest members of c.l.l think that COBOL is the same language it was
> 30-40 years ago, be aware that COBOL is _still_ under active development
> and the community reacts appropriately to the demands of new technology.
> INCITS/J4 is a sibling committee to INCITS/J13, and they have active
> projects. See http://www.cobolstandards.com/ . IIRC O-O programming
> was added to COBOL some years ago, and language bindings to XML are
> underway.
The latest ISO standard published in December 2002? And already working
towards a revision in 2008? I'm impressed. Ansi CL looks old against
it... :-)
Seriously: There must be a number of people out there putting real money
into the development of the COBOL language. I really would not have
expected that.
Programmer Dude
> IIRC O-O programming was added to COBOL some years ago,...
The joke goes that the OO version of COBOL is called:
POST-INCREMENT-COBOL-BY-ONE
--
|_ CJSonnack <Ch...@Sonnack.com> _____________| How's my programming? |
|_ http://www.Sonnack.com/ ___________________| Call: 1-800-DEV-NULL |
|_____________________________________________|_______________________|
Kenny Tilton
Programmer Dude wrote:
> "Steven M. Haflich" wrote:
>
>
>>IIRC O-O programming was added to COBOL some years ago,...
>
>
> The joke goes that the OO version of COBOL is called:
>
> POST-INCREMENT-COBOL-BY-ONE
>
I like "ADD 1 TO COBOL"
--
kenny tilton
clinisys, inc
http://www.tilton-technology.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------
"Career highlights? I had two. I got an intentional walk from
Sandy Koufax and I got out of a rundown against the Mets."
-- Bob Uecker
Simon Katz
> Programmer Dude wrote:
> > "Steven M. Haflich" wrote:
> >
> >
> >>IIRC O-O programming was added to COBOL some years ago,...
> >
> >
> > The joke goes that the OO version of COBOL is called:
> >
> > POST-INCREMENT-COBOL-BY-ONE
> >
>
> I like "ADD 1 TO COBOL"
ADD 1 TO COBOL GIVING COBOL-PLUS-PLUS.