Regular Expressions and Standard COBOL (was Re: Use of Class

Just an interesting web page I found when looking to see whether or not
EBCDIC does indeed not have a caret character.

http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=!%3D

Interestingly, I did an experiment where I used FTP to transfer an ASCII
file containing a caret to our mainframe.  It ended up translating the caret
to hex B0.  When I viewed the uploaded file from my TN3270 session it just
showed as '?', which is what shows for all 'non-display' characters.  I
don't know if the '?' is put there by the mainframe program I was working
with or by my TN3270 client.  I think the former.

I have a photocopy of a "yellow card" (though I think the one I copied was
green!) and it indeed does not show B0 as meaning caret, or anything else
for that matter.

Also interestingly is this page:
http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infoc...sp?topic=/com.i
bm.entcobol4.doc/rlebccs.htm.
It shows "the collating sequence for single-byte EBCDIC code page 1140",
which shows B0 as, indeed, being a caret.

I'd never heard of code page 1140, but apparently it is code page 037 + the
Euro symbol:

037 (IBM EBCDIC US-Canada)
1047 (IBM EBCDIC Latin 1/Open System)
1140 (IBM EBCDIC US-Canada (037 + Euro symbol); IBM EBCDIC (US-Canada-Euro)
)

Yet another interesting page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EBCDIC_8859

Hmm, here it shows code page 037 having the caret as B0:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EBCDIC_037.

Code pages are fun!  (Not.)

Frank

Howard Brazee wrote:
> On Sat, 7 Jul 2007 04:41:37 +1200, "Pete Dashwood"
> <dashwood@removethis.enternet.co.nz> wrote:
> 
>
> ...
> 
>
> I'm curious.   Certainly C# has its strengths, and there are jobs it
> does quite well.    But as someone who doesn't believe that one tool
> is the best for all jobs, I don't see that C#'s strengths and uses are
> a good match for CoBOL's.

At my last assignment, our formerly-on-the-mainframe source code control
system was moved to the web, with parts in C#.  (In fact, that big thing
I posted back in February was part of it.)

> But that doesn't mean you aren't right.   I tend to think CoBOL is
> being replaced by something even more different than C# is - and
> that's a combination of intelligent databases, report programs, and
> interfaces instead of any one language.
>
> I don't see companies replacing their CoBOL green bar report program
> with a C# XML report program.

(As you like to say) For various values of "language".  :)

I'd venture to say that most all systems use more than one language -
the aircraft maintenance system that I worked on at my last base used
COBOL, Java, JavaScript, HTML, XML, XSLT, SQL, and a proprietary network
database language called DML.

What you've described above falls nicely within the Model View
Controller methodology.  The "model" is the persistent data store, the
"view" is the way information is presented to the user, and the
"controller" is the bridge between the two.

Then, is XML a language in the same way as COBOL, Java, or C#?  I've
seen XML used for lots of things - configuration parameters, a
structured way of passing data internally between modules, formatting
data for exchange with other systems, even as the output displayed to
the user (formatted with XSLT).

I'm not saying you're wrong about this - just adding to it.  I see the
common factor coming down to XML.  No matter how you get to it (COBOL,
C#, Java, QuickBASIC), and no matter what you do with it (look at it
with human eyes, load it into a database, or use it to tell other
software what to do), XML is the glue that holds it all together.

--
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~     / \/ _ o     ~          Live from Albuquerque, NM!          ~
~     _ /\   |     ~                                              ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ Business E-mail  ~ daniel @ "Business Website" below            ~
~ Business Website ~ http://www.djs-consulting.com                ~
~ Tech Blog        ~ http://www.djs-consulting.com/linux/blog     ~
~ Personal E-mail  ~ "Personal Blog" as e-mail address            ~
~ Personal Blog    ~ http://daniel.summershome.org                ~
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

GEEKCODE 3.12 GCS/IT d s-:+ a C++ L++ E--- W++ N++ o? K- w$ !O M--
V PS+ PE++ Y? !PGP t+ 5? X+ R* tv b+ DI++ D+ G- e h---- r+++ z++++

"Who is more irrational?  A man who believes in a God he doesn't see,
or a man who's offended by a God he doesn't believe in?" - Brad Stine

Messrs. Dashwood, Smith et al;

Pete Dashwood wrote:
> This is my last response on this.
>
> See below.

[snip]

Other than the personal attacks, which I deem quite unnecessary, (lame?
maybe not as thorough, but lame?) betwixt two such intelligent,
thoughtful people and other thinking people who have commented as well
(William, Howard, Charles, Alistair & Daniel and Doc), I found the
discussion quite enlightening.  I thank all of you for contributing.

Mr. Dashwood, I thank you once more for your explanation of the RE that
you use.  And Mr. Smith, I thank you as well for your improved RE and
for defining the fine points that argue against Mr. Dashwood's ideas for
improving or modernizing COBOL.  This forum has been quite eye-opening.
The state of the language, of the minds of COBOL programmers express a
range of thoughts, solutions and feelings that remind me of the tower of
Babel.  We cannot expect a committee to do any more than reflect the
multiple voices.  Camels are horses ...

I know that certain strong feeling were evoked by this thread and it's
relatives.  That is a good thing.  It is only by the continuing
discussion that the finer points of an idea can be brought to light.  I
would ask that the rhetoric attacking people be left out since it
doesn't further anyone's understanding.  I suggest that responding to
such attacks doesn't help either.

This is a forum for discussion.  It is wonderful.  You folks are
incredible, taking the time to explain your ideas to the world.  Please
do not silence your own voice or an other's voice.  I am ashamed that I
caused such a row.

Richard Brady

Richard Brady wrote:
> I am ashamed that I caused such a row.

Don't sweat it.  You should have been here when the debates over periods
/ full stops were raging...  :)  There are also some personality
conflicts, as with any group of folks.  IMO, I think the term "lame" may
have been what set it off...

--
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~     / \/ _ o     ~          Live from Albuquerque, NM!          ~
~     _ /\   |     ~                                              ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ Business E-mail  ~ daniel @ "Business Website" below            ~
~ Business Website ~ http://www.djs-consulting.com                ~
~ Tech Blog        ~ http://www.djs-consulting.com/linux/blog     ~
~ Personal E-mail  ~ "Personal Blog" as e-mail address            ~
~ Personal Blog    ~ http://daniel.summershome.org                ~
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

GEEKCODE 3.12 GCS/IT d s-:+ a C++ L++ E--- W++ N++ o? K- w$ !O M--
V PS+ PE++ Y? !PGP t+ 5? X+ R* tv b+ DI++ D+ G- e h---- r+++ z++++

"Who is more irrational?  A man who believes in a God he doesn't see,
or a man who's offended by a God he doesn't believe in?" - Brad Stine