| Warren Simmons 2004-05-26, 12:30 am |
| I have no argument with a standards procedure.
My argument has to do with what is highest in the cue.
I see so many references to problems with internal data representation,
when, in my view, it need not be, and the vendors can still have their
own hardware designs.
I see questions on how can a file be recovered when the source program
is not available?
I don't see a lot of demand for more format changes. I resist change, too.
I dislike the way a program now reads. So what. Well I know that some
of the people here work at places where internal rules must be followed,
and that pleases me, and then I see illustrations to newbies that look
like algebra.
I see copy being widely used, but I don't see a large library of things
that can be used without coding them yourself.
There have been some improvement is presentation and experience has
corrected some bad practices, but I don't see much in the way of major
tool improvements. Mostly, I see is that I lack the clarity, and I know
it's because I haven't had the IT training many of current people have.
The worst thing I see today, is that Open source could provide very
large improvements in the uniform methods that users should want, but
don't seem to care that they exist. Not invented here.
COBOL is about good documentation, and better productivity as well
as uniformity. The current procedures you describe tend to freeze
the extension of the basic ideas. However, some vendors create packages
that are super tools for some applications that make them rich, and
still keeps the user unaware of how and what the tool does, or how to
change it as needed on time. A computer system run and designed by an
outside organization is not my idea of a good way to do business in
many cases. I am alway thrilled to learn that some piece of software
was written in COBOL because it supposed to be for Business Systems.
I have no part in this now, and only find this a place to vent.
Warren Simmons
Jersey
|