On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 10:22 AM, Mads Lindstrøm <mads_lindstr...@yahoo.dk> wrote: > Looking at Wikipedia I can see that COBOL 2002[1] got user defined > functions, but prior it was impossible to define your own functions. You > could define sub-rutines (semantically similar to jsr/gosub in > assembler/basic), but not functions that could be used like the build-in > (intrinsic in COBOL speak) functions. Most COBOL programmers properly > still do not use user-defined functions. So from their perspective, it > is perfectly reasonable to see functions as part of the language.
Talking to old COBOL programmers who think their language is relevant because current revisions have some modern features is very depressing. The desperate look in their eyes cuts like a knife. The best you can do is condescendingly tell them what they want to hear the way you would to a small child. Warren _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
