Obsolete elements of COBOL language

I believe that most elements of the Identification Division is
considered obsolete. I have been looking for a source I could cite for
that, such as which standard classified those elements as obsolete.

But, being a student and being poor, I don't want to pay the $18 that
ANSI wants for their standards documentation. Additionally our Campus
library does not seem to have available these specific ANSI standards.

Long and short of it, I got docked for not including DATE-WRITTEN and
DATE-COMPILED in my program and I want my points back.

Can anyone please help?

Thanks
Mike

> Long and short of it, I got docked for not including DATE-WRITTEN and
> DATE-COMPILED in my program and I want my points back.

These are acceptable in ANS'85, which is probably the standard that
your compiler is conformant with and are "classed as obsolete elements
in ANSI'85 standard and may be deleted from the next full revision of
the ANSI Standard".  I don't have the '02 standard to check.

The inclusion of these or not should be stated in the site standard
which may also detail what other commentary items are required.

Even if these items are rejected by your compiler they could be written
with a * in column 7.

I don't actually see any point in DATE-COMPILED. The compiler may, or
may not, change the comment on an output listing to the actual date but
I haven't used an actual listing for decades, and compilers that I have
used put the date and time on the page header. Also the output
executable file date/time is a more accurate indicator of the last time
it was sucessfully compiled.

With one system that was widely distributed I had the compile script
create a copybook with the date, time and system version as VALUEs and
this was COPYed into the program as it compiled. Markers in the
copybook allowed a program to search the executable and extract this so
that automated site audits of program versions could be done.

You are correct that those were identified as "OBSOLETE" in the '85 Standard
which indicated that they would "go away" in the next revision of the Standa
rd.
And, in fact, they are GONE from the '02 Standard.

Any conforming '85 Standard compiler MUST provide a mechanism for issuing an
"obsolete" warning when these features are used.  Therefore, if you tell us
which compiler you are using in class, we can probably tell you how to get t
he
"message" indicating they are obsolete.  I would think/hope that your instru
ctor
would accept this.

However, if you tell us which compiler you are using, we might also be able 
to
point you to their documentation saying the same thing.

P.S.  As Richard has already indicated there are things that you can "do" wi
th
such paragraphs in existing code and I don't know which (if any) vendor will
actually drop them, but I agree with you that you should NOT lose points for
omitting them.  On the other hand, if the instructor gave you "shop standard
s"
to follow in creating your code, it MIGHT be useful to learn to follow such
rules - even if them seem "wrong" to you.  That is part of the real world of
programming at many shops.

--
Bill Klein
wmklein <at> ix.netcom.com
"Mike" <MPBrede@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1128539271.173935.141610@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>I believe that most elements of the Identification Division is
> considered obsolete. I have been looking for a source I could cite for
> that, such as which standard classified those elements as obsolete.
>
> But, being a student and being poor, I don't want to pay the $18 that
> ANSI wants for their standards documentation. Additionally our Campus
> library does not seem to have available these specific ANSI standards.
>
> Long and short of it, I got docked for not including DATE-WRITTEN and
> DATE-COMPILED in my program and I want my points back.
>
> Can anyone please help?
>
> Thanks
> Mike
>

William M. Klein wrote:
> You are correct that those were identified as "OBSOLETE" in the '85 Standa
rd
> which indicated that they would "go away" in the next revision of the Stan
dard.
> And, in fact, they are GONE from the '02 Standard.
>
> Any conforming '85 Standard compiler MUST provide a mechanism for issuing 
an
> "obsolete" warning when these features are used.  Therefore, if you tell u
s
> which compiler you are using in class, we can probably tell you how to get
 the
> "message" indicating they are obsolete.  I would think/hope that your inst
ructor
> would accept this.
>
> However, if you tell us which compiler you are using, we might also be abl
e to
> point you to their documentation saying the same thing.

I'm using Microfocus Mainframe Express 2.5.

But I definitely do NOT want compiler errors in work to be handed in,
we were told that compiler errors are an automatic -50%.

>
> P.S.  As Richard has already indicated there are things that you can "do" 
with
> such paragraphs in existing code and I don't know which (if any) vendor wi
ll
> actually drop them, but I agree with you that you should NOT lose points f
or
> omitting them.  On the other hand, if the instructor gave you "shop standa
rds"
> to follow in creating your code, it MIGHT be useful to learn to follow suc
h
> rules - even if them seem "wrong" to you.  That is part of the real world 
of
> programming at many shops.

We were told to program with well-structured code and to adopt a coding
standard of our choosing, so nothing so definite as including specific
elements was specified.

I'm generally pretty good at following instructions, even if I can
think of a better way to accomplish the same objective. I understand
that we are being tested on the stuff we're being taught, not the stuff
we can think up.

Thank you for your help.

There is a REAL difference between compiler errors and informational errors.
  If
your instructor doesn't understand this, then you should get another instruc
tor
(ASAP).

Try compiling your program with
FLAGSTD(O)  (that's the letter "O")

and see what the listing shows.

As far as what (documentation) you should refer your instructor to, have the
m
look at:
http://supportline.microfocus.com//...30/mx30indx.htm

and go to:

"Chapter 7: Summary of Obsolete Language Elements"

In the Language Reference "Additional Topics" manual.

***

As you are using "Mainframe Express" is your class supposed to be preparing 
you
for IBM mainframe COBOL?  If so, you can also refer your instructor to:

[url]http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/igy3lr30/PREFACE.1.4[/u
rl]

"PREFACE.1.4 Obsolete language elements"

--
Bill Klein
wmklein <at> ix.netcom.com
"Mike" <MPBrede@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1128547492.174013.174480@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> William M. Klein wrote: 
>
> I'm using Microfocus Mainframe Express 2.5.
>
> But I definitely do NOT want compiler errors in work to be handed in,
> we were told that compiler errors are an automatic -50%.
> 
>
> We were told to program with well-structured code and to adopt a coding
> standard of our choosing, so nothing so definite as including specific
> elements was specified.
>
> I'm generally pretty good at following instructions, even if I can
> think of a better way to accomplish the same objective. I understand
> that we are being tested on the stuff we're being taught, not the stuff
> we can think up.
>
> Thank you for your help.
>

--
Bill Klein
wmklein <at> ix.netcom.com
"William M. Klein" <wmklein@nospam.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:_EX0f.114964$s83.100477@fe08.news.easynews.com...
> There is a REAL difference between compiler errors and informational error
s.
> If your instructor doesn't understand this, then you should get another
> instructor (ASAP).
>
> Try compiling your program with
>  FLAGSTD(O)  (that's the letter "O")
>
> and see what the listing shows.
>
> As far as what (documentation) you should refer your instructor to, have t
hem
> look at:
>  http://supportline.microfocus.com//...30/mx30indx.htm
>
> and go to:
>
> "Chapter 7: Summary of Obsolete Language Elements"
>
> In the Language Reference "Additional Topics" manual.
>
>   ***
>
> As you are using "Mainframe Express" is your class supposed to be preparin
g
> you for IBM mainframe COBOL?  If so, you can also refer your instructor to
:
>
> [url]http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/igy3lr30/PREFACE.1.4[
/url]
>
> "PREFACE.1.4 Obsolete language elements"
>
> --
> Bill Klein
> wmklein <at> ix.netcom.com
> "Mike" <MPBrede@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1128547492.174013.174480@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... 
>
>

OOPS (my typo).  That first sentence should have been

> There is a REAL difference between compiler errors and informational messages.[/co
lor]


--
Bill Klein
wmklein <at> ix.netcom.com
"William M. Klein" <wmklein@nospam.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:_EX0f.114964$s83.100477@fe08.news.easynews.com...
> There is a REAL difference between compiler errors and informational error
s.
> If your instructor doesn't understand this, then you should get another
> instructor (ASAP).
>
> Try compiling your program with
>  FLAGSTD(O)  (that's the letter "O")
>
> and see what the listing shows.
>
> As far as what (documentation) you should refer your instructor to, have t
hem
> look at:
>  http://supportline.microfocus.com//...30/mx30indx.htm
>
> and go to:
>
> "Chapter 7: Summary of Obsolete Language Elements"
>
> In the Language Reference "Additional Topics" manual.
>
>   ***
>
> As you are using "Mainframe Express" is your class supposed to be preparin
g
> you for IBM mainframe COBOL?  If so, you can also refer your instructor to
:
>
> [url]http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/igy3lr30/PREFACE.1.4[
/url]
>
> "PREFACE.1.4 Obsolete language elements"
>
> --
> Bill Klein
> wmklein <at> ix.netcom.com
> "Mike" <MPBrede@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1128547492.174013.174480@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... 
>
>

Mike wrote:
>
> I believe that most elements of the Identification Division is
> considered obsolete. I have been looking for a source I could cite for
> that, such as which standard classified those elements as obsolete.
>
> But, being a student and being poor, I don't want to pay the $18 that
> ANSI wants for their standards documentation. Additionally our Campus
> library does not seem to have available these specific ANSI standards.
>
> Long and short of it, I got docked for not including DATE-WRITTEN and
> DATE-COMPILED in my program and I want my points back.

Why fight it?  You know better now.  It's a long-standing principle that
you can't get marks by disagreeing with your instructor, even if you
know s/he's wrong.  (Unless you got a Fail on the whole assignment: then
you fight).


PL

Look in the cobol for dummies book, he seems to cover most elements and I
believe the obsolete elements of each divisions are cited.


"Mike" <MPBrede@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1128539271.173935.141610@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> I believe that most elements of the Identification Division is
> considered obsolete. I have been looking for a source I could cite for
> that, such as which standard classified those elements as obsolete.
>
> But, being a student and being poor, I don't want to pay the $18 that
> ANSI wants for their standards documentation. Additionally our Campus
> library does not seem to have available these specific ANSI standards.
>
> Long and short of it, I got docked for not including DATE-WRITTEN and
> DATE-COMPILED in my program and I want my points back.
>
> Can anyone please help?
>
> Thanks
> Mike
>

..    On  05.10.05
wrote  wmklein@nospam.netcom.com (William M. Klein)
on  /COMP/LANG/COBOL
in  _EX0f.114964$s83.100477@fe08.news.easynews.com
about  Re: Obsolete elements of COBOL language


WMK> As far as what (documentation) you should refer your instructor to,
WMK> have them look at:
WMK>   http://supportline.microfocus.com//...oks/mx30/mx30in
WMK> dx.htm
WMK>
WMK> and go to:
WMK>
WMK>  "Chapter 7: Summary of Obsolete Language Elements"
WMK>
WMK> In the Language Reference "Additional Topics" manual.

For the benefit of Mike Brede, here are two quotes from the 1985
standard document, pages XVII-81 and XVII-82:


--------- schnipp -----------------------------------------

APPENDIX C: LANGUAGE ELEMENT LISTS

1. OBSOLETE LANGUAGE ELEMENT LIST

The purpose of the obsolete language element category is to limit the
impact of deleting features that are seen as obsolete or improperly
specified. It is felt by X3J4 that, although the elements in this
category are obsolete, their abrupt removal from Standard COBOL would
be a disservice to COBOL users. Features placed in the obsolete
element category have the following characteristics:

Language elements to be deleted from Standard COBOL will first be
identified as obsolete language elements prior to being deleted.
Obsolete language elements will be neither enhanced, modified, nor
maintained.

The interaction between obsolete language elements and other language
elements is undefined unless otherwise specified in Standard COBOL.
Obsolete language elements will be deleted from the next revision of
Standard COBOL.

A conforming implementation of Standard COBOL is required to support
obsolete language elements of the subset and levels of optional
modules for which support is claimed.

The following is a list of the obsolete language elements in third
Standard COBOL. Associated with each obsolete language element in this
list is a justification for placing that element into the obsolete
element category.


--------- schnipp -----------------------------------------

(3) AUTHOR, INSTALLATION, DATE-WRITTEN, DATE-COMPILED, and SECURITY
paragraphs (1 NUC).

The AUTHOR, INSTALLATION, DATE-WRITTEN, DATE-COMPILED, and SECURITY
paragraphs in the Identification Division have been placed in the
obsolete element category.

Justification:

The purpose of the AUTHOR, INSTALLATION, DATE-WRITTEN, DATE-COMPILED,
and SECURITY paragraphs can be achieved through the use of comment
lines within the Identification Division since these paragraphs have
no effect on the operating of a COBOL program.

The goal of cleaning up and regularizing the COBOL language has been
achieved by declaring many implementor-defined elements as obsolete.
The format of the DATE-COMPILED and SECURITY paragraphs are examples
of comment-entry paragraphs which are defined by the implementor.

The interaction of the COPY statement with the comment-entries in the
AUTHOR, INSTALLATION, DATE-WRITTEN, DATE-COMPILED, and SECURITY
paragraphs is often ambiguous, i.e. the presence of the word COPY in a
comment-entry versus the use of the COPY statement in a comment-entry.


------------------ schnapp --------------------------------


and from page I-7:

--------- schnipp -----------------------------------------

1.5.2.3 Obsolete Language Elements

Obsolete language elements are identified as language elements in
Standard COBOL which will be deleted from the next revision of
Standard COBOL (see page XVII-81, Obsolete Language Element List).
Obsolete language elements have been neither enhanced nor modified
during the preparation of Standard COBOL. The interaction between
obsolete language elements and other language elements is undefined
unless otherwise specified in Standard COBOL. Language elements to be
deleted from Standard COBOL will first be identified as obsolete
language elements prior to being deleted.

A conforming implementation of Standard COBOL is required to support
obsolete language elements of the subset and levels of optional
modules for which support is claimed. Documentation associated with an
implementation must identify all obsolete language elements in the
implementation.

A conforming implementation of Standard COBOL must provide a warning
mechanism, which optionally may be invoked by the user at compile time
to indicate, if appropriate, that a program contains obsolete language
elements (see page XVII-81).

------------------ schnapp --------------------------------




Yours,
Lüko Willms                                     http://www.willms-edv.de
/--------- L.WILLMS@jpberlin.de -- Alle Rechte vorbehalten --

Eine ganze Milchstraße von Einfällen. -G.C.Lichtenberg