On Tue, 2003-08-26 at 17:22, bob parker wrote: > On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 00:25, Ron Johnson wrote: > > On Tue, 2003-08-26 at 08:50, Kirk Strauser wrote: > > > At 2003-08-26T12:52:33Z, Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > Too bad you have such a negative view of COBOL. In the hands of > > > > someone with a brain, it's quite a powerful and modular language. > > > > > > All Turing-complete languages are equally powerful. That doesn't mean > > > that any given one would fill me with a desire to start hacking around > > > with it. > > > > > > You know, I'd never seen Cobol before the screenshots on your link. > > > Those just confirmed everything I've heard about it. :) > > > > For a "Hello, World" program, or an OS, or a graphics toolkit, even > > Admiral Hooper would not say that COBOL is the proper tool. OTOH, > > for large commercial apps, COBOL is far and away the best tool for > > the job. > > I particularly like the way it deletes the most significant figure(s) when > you get an overflow in a numeric field. Or so it did last time I had anything > to do with it.
Must have been a compiler option or implementation decision. Our programs machine checked on overflow. -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Ron Johnson, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jefferson, LA USA "Fair is where you take your cows to be judged." Unknown -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]