| Robert 2008-03-14, 3:55 am |
| On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 15:37:04 -0500, "SeaSideSam" <SeaSideSam@TheBeach> wrote:
>robert. it took me a while but i finally removed all the 'personal' stuff and what remained was this....
You have me  with Richard. I'm the dog who sleeps in the house.
>******************************
>If my program, loaded and running, CALLs a subroutine for the first
>then it will create a new working-storage for that. When I CANCEL it
>will destroy that area and make it available for reuse by another.
>
>This could happen even if the program was linked so that the program
>code loaded with the run unit.
>
>In OO COBOL a new object will dynamically create a new working-storage
>for itself.
>*********************************
>
>you make some claims here as if they were 'absolutes'. 'When I CANCEL...' and 'In OO...' are the two i am refering to. i've noticed that you are a sensitive fellow
If either of us were sensitive, he wouldn't be posting here.
> so i'm letting it be
> known that i have no desire to get in a pissing contest with you,
Ahh, go ahead.
>but my 30+ years as a professional computer programmer
A neophyte, huh?
>taught me that there are few 'absolutes' when it comes to hardware and software vendors and the way they 'interpret' and 'implement' a standard.
The idea of standards is to REMOVE ambiguity.
>as an aside... i have yet to see an implementation that 'destroys' anything other than a pointer when a called program returns control to the calling program regardless of the method.
You haven't seen the CANCEL verb.
>any decent ibm assembler programmer from the 70's or 80's could demonstrate this for you.
Let's not get into decency.
>with the exception of the personal stuff i am enjoying the exchange. and since i haven't been paid to program for... geee... 15 years now... i not only find the exchange informative but entertaining as well.
Fifteen years between gigs might be a record. Is your resume written with Grabit?
|