On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 08:24:40AM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote: > > > I'll bite: why do you need COBOL? You've go C, Fortran, and Ada in > > Because apps written in COBOL are highly portable across platforms.
Only if the platform has a COBOL compiler, which I think is the problem under discussion. Ada is highly portable. > > > gcc, plus Python (interpreted). IIUC, the philosophy behind COBOL is > > that non-programmers can at least read it to understand what is > > That bit of stupidness went out the window decades ago. > > > happening. You can achieve that with Python if you're careful. Also, I > > believe its one of the minor goals of Ada. > > > > Of course, if you _need_ a COBOL compiler, you _need_ COBOL. It seems > > that OpenCOBOL traslates COBOL to C and then compiles that with gcc. > > I'd hate to see that C code. Thats the design decision that was made for f77 which has been abandoned but gfortran 95 isn't fully functional yet (according to its own docs). Doug. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
