[Default] On 11 Jun 2020 16:17:47 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
rreyno...@cix.co.uk (Rupert Reynolds) wrote:
>I lost faith COBOL and finallly became a PL/1 biggot when I was told that
>ALTER GOTO was introduced to help support structured programmng :-)
As someone who made extensive use ALTER x-
Confession: before I was a PL/1 bigot, I was an Assembler H bigot (now I'm
both) :-)
Rupert
On Fri, Jun 12, 2020, 05:10 Bob Bridges wrote:
> Heck, I was a PL/1 bigot from the start. There are other languages I
> like, but I remember PL/1 with a kind of rosy glow - possibly because I
> never us
>Those were added w/ COBOL 2002, not 2014. Don't give yourself too much cre=
>dit!
I noticed that too, and thought I had corrected my post, but I guess I failed!
Cheers,
TomR >> COBOL is the Language of the Future! <<
Heck, I was a PL/1 bigot from the start. There are other languages I like, but
I remember PL/1 with a kind of rosy glow - possibly because I never use it any
more.
---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313
/* I think everyone who chooses to stay out of politics (which is your r
I lost faith COBOL and finallly became a PL/1 biggot when I was told that
ALTER GOTO was introduced to help support structured programmng :-)
Rupert
On Thu, Jun 11, 2020, 01:07 Tom Ross wrote:
> >The addition of EXIT PARAGRAPH
> >and EXIT SECTION have eliminated most of the reasons for use of G
[Default] On 10 Jun 2020 17:14:25 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
tmr...@stlvm20.vnet.ibm.com (Tom Ross) wrote:
>>The addition of EXIT PARAGRAPH
>>and EXIT SECTION have eliminated most of the reasons for use of GO TO
>>in COBOL. I would be interested in any corrections to my
>>understanding by th
Those were added w/ COBOL 2002, not 2014. Don't give yourself too much credit!
🙂
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Tom
Ross
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2020 6:07 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Goto Statements AND COBOL OPTIMIZ
>The addition of EXIT PARAGRAPH
>and EXIT SECTION have eliminated most of the reasons for use of GO TO
>in COBOL. I would be interested in any corrections to my
>understanding by those responsible for the COBOL compiler. =20
I partially agree, Clark, but what really made it easy to get rid of GOT
On 08/06/2020 12:35, Seymour J Metz wrote:
Didn't Datamation introduce COMEFROM much earlier?
It seems a small inter"think" with the archive service in my head is required
:-)
Thanks.
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / ar
[Default] On 8 Jun 2020 01:55:52 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
dcrayf...@gmail.com (David Crayford) wrote:
>I learned JSP back in the early 90's. It was popular in the UK (Jackson
>was British) and most large mainframe companies adopted it. It was good.
>There was even tooling that
>could crea
une 8, 2020 4:00 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Goto Statements
Hi,
Presented in an April 84 edition of a scientific journal. The fortran COMEFROM
nnn :-)
A student in internship in the 80 implemented it (as a joke to see whether his
prof reads the work)
for his fortran 88 compiler.
l.com]
Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 4:28 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Goto Statements (was: COBOL Question)
Dijkstra wrote his missive around 1968. Knuth made a meal of it and after
reading his paper which was published 5 years later, it was too hard a read.
Around the same time Mi
I learned JSP back in the early 90's. It was popular in the UK (Jackson
was British) and most large mainframe companies adopted it. It was good.
There was even tooling that
could create code from charts.
Dijkstra's paper is one of the most controversial CS papers ever
written. It was written b
Some wag published this in an internal IBM publication back in 1978, with
full examples. It sucked us in at the time.
On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 6:01 PM Peter Sylvester
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Presented in an April 84 edition of a scientific journal. The fortran
> COMEFROM nnn :-)
>
> A student in internsh
Dijkstra wrote his missive around 1968. Knuth made a meal of it and after
reading his paper which was published 5 years later, it was too hard a read.
Around the same time Michael Jackson was distilling this information and
produced his structured programming book "Principles of Program Design". I
Hi,
Presented in an April 84 edition of a scientific journal. The fortran COMEFROM
nnn :-)
A student in internship in the 80 implemented it (as a joke to see whether his prof reads the work)
for his fortran 88 compiler.
The implementation is simple.
Peter Sylvester
---
On 2020-06-07 10:48 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
I consider the out of line PERFORM to be far more dangerous. I have a similar
issue with REXX; it does not have lexical scope, and you can fall into a
procedure.
A noteworthy 1976 paper (behind a paywall):
Software malpractice — a distasteful
://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of
Clark Morris [cfmt...@uniserve.com]
Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 2:05 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Goto Statements (was: COBOL Question)
[Default
[Default] On 7 Jun 2020 03:33:44 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
sme...@gmu.edu (Seymour J Metz) wrote:
>I generally get by with control structures like case (select/when),
>if/elsif/when, iterate and leave, but I unashamedly use GOTO, when it is the
>cleanest way to do something; I refuse to av
//mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of
Paul Gilmartin [000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 10:48 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Goto Statements (was:
On Sun, 7 Jun 2020 10:33:34 +, Seymour J Metz wrote:
>I generally get by with control structures like case (select/when),
>if/elsif/when, iterate and leave, but I unashamedly use GOTO, when it is the
>cleanest way to do something; I refuse to avoid a useful construct just
>because it is not
I generally get by with control structures like case (select/when),
if/elsif/when, iterate and leave, but I unashamedly use GOTO, when it is the
cleanest way to do something; I refuse to avoid a useful construct just because
it is not politically correct. In the case of COBOL, I consider the out
22 matches
Mail list logo
