Rich kids are into COBOL
bfranchuk at jetnet.ab.ca
Wed Feb 18 01:01:41 CST 2015
On 2/17/2015 11:55 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote:
> On 02/17/2015 09:27 PM, Mouse wrote:
>> That is no surprise to me. If you were to take code written in C and
>> translate it into COBOL, I'd generally expect the COBOL code to be
>> longer and harder to maintain, too.
> COBOL implements a PICTURE specification, and, with the exception of
> PL/I, which copied it, was a stroke of genius. A PICTURE clause
> specifies not only the display format, but also the type, scaling and
> You may think that the CORRESPONDING modifier is a singularly bad idea,
> but it has its uses.
> How many languages before COBOL had a regular syntax for defining data
I can not think of many languages before COBOL.
> COBOL is a powerful language with many different statement variations
> and, like other languages, is absolute hell in the hands of a neophyte.
I leave HELL for APL.
More information about the cctalk