For Programmers: Free Programming Magazines  


Home > Archive > Cobol > July 2006 > Re: Micro Focus position on the "Standardized" OO Collection Class Technica









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 Re: Micro Focus position on the "Standardized" OO Collection Class Technica
Richard

2006-07-27, 9:55 pm


HeyBub wrote:
> Richard wrote:
>
> There are some things you just can't do in COBOL.
>
> Flames, for example.
>
> Or what if, in the middle of a double declining balance computation you
> needed the inverse of a 100x100 matrix? AND needed to compose a ringtone to
> go with it?


In a rational world it will be known at the program specification stage
that such things are needed and it will be implemented in the most
appropriate language.

Having a 100x100 matrix in Cobol with a need to invert it it may be
more effective to code the inversion in Cobol rather than working out
how to pass that data into a Java class or Fortran array and have it
inverted there.

Alternately if there is part done already in Cobol it may be easier
and/or better to reimplement that code into Java (or Fortran) rather
than attempting to rewrite the Cobol part and some new Java part and
gluing them together.

Sponsored Links







Also available: Server administration forum archive | Web Design forum archive | Software forum archive | Hardware reviews archive

Copyright 2008 codecomments.com