COBOL fails at MOVE. It's a COPY. Maybe they should have said REPLICATE, since COPY was already taken. So, not good English.
On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 12:46 PM Tony Thigpen <t...@vse2pdf.com> wrote: > I agree with Clark. > > In addition, even the best language can have it's best features ignored > by programmers so that others can claim it's the language's fault. > > I have seen both REXX and C code that was totally unreadable due to the > programmer putting 24 nested functions in one statement. I have seen > COBOL code that is unreadable because the programmer used cryptic > variable names are very complex IF comparisons. I even saw one COBOL > program where the variables were all in Spanish in a shop in North > Alabama where there was only one programmer that spoke Spanish within > 100 miles. Totally unreadable by the guy that followed him (me). > > Don't blame the language. Blame the management that allowed programmers > to write code that was not readable by the next guy. > > I used to work for a large software development firm that had strict > standards. This was before even dial-up. Most new programmers fussed > about the programming standards. Until, they got a support call at 3am > and had to debug a program over the phone with the customer reading the > COBOL source to them. Taking a little longer to code, and typing a > little more, cost very little but added a lot of ease to the back end > when it came to support. > > Tony Thigpen > > Clark Morris wrote on 7/16/20 10:16 PM: > > [Default] On 16 Jul 2020 10:34:40 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main > > sme...@gmu.edu (Seymour J Metz) wrote: > > > >> The claim that COBOL is English like is every bit as bogus as the claim > that rewriting existing COBOL applications in another language will > magically fix problems of underfunding, understaffing and general > mismanagement. > > > > Looking at some of the comment I have seen in Assembler code including > > my own, COBOL code is close to the syntax of those comments. > > > > Clark Morris > >> > >> BTW, when the language du jour is out of fashion, will they want to > rewrite the application again, with the same pretext? And will they ensure > that this time they have adequate documentation and adequate configuration > control? > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- Wayne V. Bickerdike ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
