Re: "Substantive Changes"

I don't know exactly why EXAMINE was removed and INSPECT was added.  As far 
as I
can tell TRANSFORM was never part of any ANSI Standard.  In fact, the '74
Standard did not have the functionality of TRANSFORM in its version of INSPE
CT.
That came "back" with the '85 Standard when INSPECT CONVERTING (rather than
REPLACING) was added.

If I had a copy of the '74 Standard, I probably could "look up" in its
Substantive Change section what the rationale was.  However, they have scann
ed
the '68 Standard, but not the '74 -- so I don't have a copy.  (EXAMINE was i
n
it).

There is one VAGUE possibility (and I haven't researched this).  It seems to
 me
that I heard at one time (maybe the '60 definition - maybe later) there was 
an
attempt to have the first 2 characters of all COBOL verbs be unique.  EXAMIN
E
and EXIT would have "violated" that.  However, I think that INITIATE (and RW
)
was in by '74, that doesn't sound like the reason. Furthermore, I thought th
at
DISPLAY and DIVIDE were "always" in, so I am not certain that this was reall
y
ever true.

Bottom-Line:
I don't know why they made the change.

--
Bill Klein
wmklein <at> ix.netcom.com
"LX-i" <lxi0007@netscape.net> wrote in message
 news:ZsydnXb3zJqgzpfanZ2dnUVZ_tCrnZ2d@co
mcast.com...
> William M. Klein wrote: 
>
> That makes sense...
> 
>
> That too makes sense.  The people that wrote it know what they meant, but 
if
> they don't express it clearly enough, others don't get that insight.  Of
> course, there's also the desire of some folks to see something in particul
ar,
> especially when their compiler already works that way.  :)
> 
>
> Yikes!  That's a horrendous construct to begin with...  But, I also realiz
e
> that I came to COBOL *way* late in the game, so I have the perspective of
> learning from what others have done.  I first saw COBOL in February of 199
8.
> :)
>
> Are you familiar with the rationale regarding combining EXAMINE, INSPECT, 
and
> TRANSFORM?  I had forgotten about transform - and the syntax seemed a bit 
more
> intuitive to me.  Of course, they trained us on COBOL 85, but then put us 
in a
> COBOL 74 shop - so, we didn't learn a whole lot about the features that ha
d
> been removed in the 85 standard. Was it just an attempt to reduce the numb
er
> of reserved words?  Why not keep EXAMINE and TRANSFORM and ditch INSPECT? 
 :)
>
> --
>  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> ~     / \/ _ 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