Home > Archive > Cobol > February 2005 > RW needs reminder (was: Cross-language challenge (of POSSIBLE interest)
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
RW needs reminder (was: Cross-language challenge (of POSSIBLE interest)
|
|
| William M. Klein 2005-02-21, 3:55 am |
| "Robert Wagner" <spamblocker-robert@wagner.net> wrote in message
news:p07d11hesal31g60b1pfjbv6ap5fvfd8l5@
4ax.com...
> On 18 Feb 2005 13:59:09 -0800, "Richard" <riplin@Azonic.co.nz> wrote:
>
<snip>
> Mainframers have dealt with this dilemma for 40 years. Their solution
> was to keep their job. This explains the failure of OO Cobol. You're
> more likely to find an OO programmer from another language willing to
> use OO Cobol than to find a Cobol programmer willing to use OO Cobol.
> The Cobol programmer has no incentive, backed by a tradition that
> survived by resisting change.
>
Robert,
It is time to reminde you to use "in my opinion" when you are expressing
something that is HARDLY proven and probably (to the best of my knowledge) even
"common consensus"..
There are many reasons that OO COBOL hasn't (yet) caught on - on (IBM)
mainframes. Not the least of which is (IMHO) lack of *any* "buiseness" oriented
(vendor) class libraries (for COBOL, PL/I C++, Java or ANY language available
for IBM mainframes)
--
Bill Klein
wmklein <at> ix.netcom.com
| |
| Robert Wagner 2005-02-22, 3:55 am |
| On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 03:21:30 GMT, "William M. Klein"
<wmklein@nospam.netcom.com> wrote:
>"Robert Wagner" <spamblocker-robert@wagner.net> wrote in message
> news:p07d11hesal31g60b1pfjbv6ap5fvfd8l5@
4ax.com...
><snip>
>
>Robert,
> It is time to reminde you to use "in my opinion" when you are expressing
>something that is HARDLY proven and probably (to the best of my knowledge) even
>"common consensus"..
>
>There are many reasons that OO COBOL hasn't (yet) caught on - on (IBM)
>mainframes. Not the least of which is (IMHO) lack of *any* "business" oriented
>(vendor) class libraries (for COBOL, PL/I C++, Java or ANY language available
>for IBM mainframes)
The programming landscape is awash with free and inexpensive Java
class libraries. Forms, report generators, PDFs, decimal arithmetic
and charts are readily available. Does Business require something more
specialized? Is there some reason Java source doesn't work on IBM
mainframes? Is there a problem communicating between Cobol and Java,
such as missing prototypes?
| |
| William M. Klein 2005-02-22, 3:55 am |
| None of those are libraries that SOLVE "business" needs (I can never remember
which is "vertical" and which is "horizontal"). The class libraries you mention
meet PROGRAMMING needs.
FYI,
IBM is doing a lot to "encourage" the use of Java on their mainframes (check
out Zaap's) - and the current Enterprise COBOL works well (I hear) in that
environment.
--
Bill Klein
wmklein <at> ix.netcom.com
"Robert Wagner" <spamblocker-robert@wagner.net> wrote in message
news:pvsk119c51vgu89g4fcddq665m85cvipj9@
4ax.com...
> On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 03:21:30 GMT, "William M. Klein"
> <wmklein@nospam.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>
> The programming landscape is awash with free and inexpensive Java
> class libraries. Forms, report generators, PDFs, decimal arithmetic
> and charts are readily available. Does Business require something more
> specialized? Is there some reason Java source doesn't work on IBM
> mainframes? Is there a problem communicating between Cobol and Java,
> such as missing prototypes?
>
| |
| Robert Wagner 2005-02-22, 3:55 am |
| On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 03:23:12 GMT, "William M. Klein"
<wmklein@nospam.netcom.com> wrote:
>None of those are libraries that SOLVE "business" needs (I can never remember
>which is "vertical" and which is "horizontal"). The class libraries you mention
>meet PROGRAMMING needs.
>
>FYI,
> IBM is doing a lot to "encourage" the use of Java on their mainframes (check
>out Zaap's) - and the current Enterprise COBOL works well (I hear) in that
>environment.
Ohmygod, Business (pronounced bidness in Texas) has strong needs. What
are they?
The companies I work for, which are emulated by others as Best
Practices, don't think their needs are special. They just take care of
business with regular programming.
| |
| Richard 2005-02-22, 3:55 am |
| > The companies I work for, which are emulated by others as Best
Practices,
Didn't most of the companies that you worked for go belly up ?
RW>> Only one of the ten companies is still in business.
| |
| Robert Wagner 2005-02-22, 3:55 pm |
| On 21 Feb 2005 20:29:24 -0800, "Richard" <riplin@Azonic.co.nz> wrote:
>Practices,
>
>Didn't most of the companies that you worked for go belly up ?
>
>RW>> Only one of the ten companies is still in business.
The companies where I was 'perm' did go belly up. The record is now
ten out of ten. Since 1998, I've been a contractor at successful
companies.
|
|
|
|
|