Oh! I did not realize that you were the vendor! Well then have fun! :-)
>________________________________ > From: Charles Mills <charl...@mcn.org> >To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >Sent: Saturday, August 4, 2012 6:59 PM >Subject: Re: Is this valid COBOL syntax? > >The vendor is fixing the preprocessor. (That would be me.) > > >Charles > >Frank Swarbrick <frank.swarbr...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >>Correct. >>Where will you go from here? >>Frank >> >> >> >> >>>________________________________ >>> From: Charles Mills <charl...@mcn.org> >>>To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >>>Sent: Friday, August 3, 2012 11:12 AM >>>Subject: Re: Is this valid COBOL syntax? >>> >>>Frank (and also now John M.) - >>> >>>You've got it. When John M. said his compiler was generating an error I >>>started running some experiments. It took about twenty experiments, but here >>>is the answer. >>> >>>The following program compiles cleanly (except for a sequence error), but if >>>you remove the DATE-COMPILED line it does not. For the sample below, lines >>>20 through 33 are part of the DATE-COMPILED paragraph. It is deceptive >>>source code. What appears to be part of the REMARKS paragraph or something >>>like that is in fact part of the DATE-COMPILED paragraph. >>> >>>00002 IDENTIFICATION DIVISION. >>>00013 PROGRAM-ID. FOO. >>>00017 DATE-COMPILED. >>>00020 *REMARKS. >>> now is the time for all go >>>00021 '************************* >>>00022 '* blah blah blah >>>00022 '* blah blah blah >>>00033 FOO. >>> DATA DIVISION. >>> WORKING-STORAGE SECTION. >>> 01 TRANS-NAME PIC X(20). >>> PROCEDURE DIVISION. >>> MAIN-PROCEDURE. >>> STOP RUN. >>>Charles >>> >>>-----Original Message----- >>>From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On >>>Behalf Of Frank Swarbrick >>>Sent: Friday, August 03, 2012 9:53 AM >>>To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >>>Subject: Re: Is this valid COBOL syntax? >>> >>>Here is what happened. >>>The program was written in pre-COBOL II (COBOL 85) syntax. At that time the >>>REMARKS paragraph valid (I'm guessing as an IBM extension), and everything >>>following it (until the next valid phrase) was treated as, well, remarks >>>(a.k.a. comments). So it used to look something like this: >>> >>> IDENTIFICATION DIVISION. >>> PROGRAM-ID. MYPGM. >>> >>> AUTHOR. THE AUTHOR OF THIS PROGRAM. >>> REMARKS. >>> '******************* ************' >>> '* VARIOUS COMMENT-LIKE TEXT *' >>> '* VARIOUS COMMENT-LIKE TEXT *' >>> >>>When someone attempted to compile it under COBOL II they got an error on the >>>REMARKS pargraph, as it was no longer valid. Some the programmer put the >>>comment indicator asterisk in front of REMARKS and tried again. Low and >>>behold, it worked! >>> >>> >>>Why did it work? Because of the AUTHOR paragraph. (Or perhaps some other >>>paragraph; I'm just guessing AUTHOR.) The IDENTIFICATION DIVISION is >>>defined as follows: >>> >>> >>>____________________________________________________________________________ >>>______________________ >>> >>>| >>> | >>> | >>__ _IDENTIFICATION_ __DIVISION.__PROGRAM-ID__ ___ >>>__program-name_____________________________> | >>> | |_ID_____________| >>>|_._| | >>> >>>| >>> | >>> | >__ ______________________________________________ __ ___ >>>_____________________________________> | >>> | |_ ____ __ _RECURSIVE___________ __ _________ _| >>>|_._| | >>> | |_IS_| |_COMMON__ _________ _| >>>|_PROGRAM_| | >>> | | |_INITIAL_| >>>| | >>> | |_INITIAL__ ________ >>>_| | >>> | >>>|_COMMON_| | >>> >>>| >>> | >>> | >__ ______________________________________ __ >>>____________________________________________ ____> | >>> | |_AUTHOR__ ___ __ ___________________ _| |_INSTALLATION__ ___ __ >>>___________________ _| | >>> | |_._| | <_______________ | |_._| | >>><_______________ | | >>> | |___comment-entry_|_| >>>|___comment-entry_|_| | >>> >>>| >>> | >>> | >__ ____________________________________________ >>>______________________________________________> | >>> | |_DATE-WRITTEN__ ___ __ ___________________ >>>_| | >>> | |_._| | <_______________ >>>| | >>> | >>>|___comment-entry_|_| | >>> >>>| >>> | >>> | >__ _______________________________________ __ >>>________________________________________ ______>< | >>> | |_DATE-COMPILED.__ ___________________ _| |_SECURITY__ ___ __ >>>___________________ _| | >>> | | <_______________ | |_._| | >>><_______________ | | >>> | |___comment-entry_|_| >>>|___comment-entry_|_| | >>> >>>| >>> | >>> >>>|___________________________________________________________________________ >>>_______________________| >>> >>> >>> >>>As you can see, each of the optional paragraphs (AUTHOR, INSTALLATION, >>>DATE-WRITTEN, DATE-COMPILED, and SECURITY) may be followed by multiple >>>comment-entries. So what had been "remarks" comment entries are now comment >>>entries under whatever "paragraph name" immediately preceeds it. >>> >>>So technically it is valid COBOL, at least according to the Enterprise COBOL >>>standard. So technically your pre-processor needs to accept it. Will they >>>fix it to accept it? Umm, good luck! >>> >>>Your other option is to place the comment asterisks before each >>>"comment-entry". >>> >>>Note that if the program had not had any of the other optional ID DIVISION >>>paragraphs present, simply commenting out REMARKS would not have worked. >>> >>>It is perhaps worth noting the following, from the Enterprise COBOL 4.2 >>>Reference manual... >>> >>>"The following are language elements that Standard COBOL 85 categorized as >>>obsolete: >>> * AUTHOR paragraph >>> * Comment entry >>> * DATE-COMPILED paragraph >>> * DATE-WRITTEN paragraph >>> * INSTALLATION paragraph >>> * SECURITY paragraph" >>> >>> >>>---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, >>>send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN >>> >>> >>> >> >>---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, >>send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- >For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, >send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
