In
<CAPD5F5okmSeV9mtK_SfEBhw5TKbr4aZSWbPojndUQ=zfaa6...@mail.gmail.com>,
on 12/09/2011
at 05:10 PM, John Gilmore <johnwgilmore0...@gmail.com> said:
>I have known such programmers too; and it is a fair criticism of
>COBOL as it is currently used that---apart from not yet implemented
>new-standard language extensions---it makes this necessary.
AFAIK the language extensions for writing more structured COBOL
programs are fairly long in the tooth. Is there really a current
compiler that can't handle, e.g., IF-THEN-ELSE?
>The comment about FORTRAN is just rhetoric, misconceived for
>FORTRANs later than FORTRAN II.
Hogwash. FORTRAN IV isn't that much better than FORTRAN II. It wasn't
until FORTRAN 77 that it ceased being a leper.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see <http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html>
We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress.
(S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
