On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 04:37:23 GMT, in bit.listserv.ibm-main "William M. Klein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>And of course, no current customers have demonstrated any current (or expected >in the near future) need for AMODE(64) COBOL. > >-- >Bill Klein > wmklein <at> ix.netcom.com >"Ed Gould" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> On Sep 26, 2005, at 9:08 AM, Steve Comstock wrote: >> >>> ------------------SNIP--------------------------- >> >> And be aware that IBMs' cobol still doesn't support 64 bits. >> >> Ed >> I recall submitting a requirement that IBM provide 64 bit support in COBOL concurrent with CICS, DB2 and Websphere support or words to that effect. We will need 64 bit support in COBOL on day one of the time that it could be used. Then is NOT the time to decide whether there is a need for it. COBOL needs to be able to play efficiently with things like XML and the above listed subsystems. If they don't use 64 bit, then COBOL doesn't need it. If they do and interface with 64 bit application code, COBOL needs 64 bit capability. In this sense, if IBM internal communications are adequate, IBM has a better idea of the need and the time frame for the need than the customer base. We as customers should be almost yelling at IBM that we don't want to have to rewrite code just so that we can use it efficiently with JAVA, Websphere or any other offering. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
