[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [open-cobol-list] OC issues (more)

From: Sergey Kashyrin
Subject: Re: [open-cobol-list] OC issues (more)
Date: Wed Jan 18 09:48:04 2006


If Sergey may test his (bad) programs with all the compilers on the market
for why he wish to use OC ? Just in order to write that something not work ?

I'm not going to use OC on mainframe or AS400 but for other platforms (especially RS6000) I recommend to check the price of Microfocus runtime licensing (what the bastards to charge for runtime at all !!!)


----- Original Message ----- From: "Alain Lucari" <address@hidden>
To: <address@hidden>
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 1:19 PM
Subject: Re: [open-cobol-list] OC issues (more)

Hi John and the list,

Le Tue, 17 Jan 2006 19:23:08 -0500
"John R. Culleton" <address@hidden> a écrit:

On Tuesday 17 January 2006 06:55 pm, Bill Klein wrote:
> Sorry John, but this is NOT a syntax error (according to the '85
> ANSI Standard).  See (among other places), the Substantive Change
> on Page XVII-42
> which states,
> "(8) Uniaueness of reference (1 NUC). A user-defined word need not
> be unique or be capable of being made unique unless referenced."
>    ***

So it is not a syntax error, merely a sin. We always had a way to
qualify data fields when copied in,  The use of copy statements
for procedural code is a quaint actvity that I have never seen in
practice. So one more left-handed red-haired Senegalese shortstop
generates yet another exception to the exception to the

The last sensible standard was 74, and that was in some
significant ways a regression from 68. Now we have the ultimate
exercise in oxymoronity, object oriented COBOL, a clear case of
making a sow's ear from a silk purse. Fortunately no one has
completely implemented it yet.

GMH is turning over in her grave, poor dear.

Sorry, I don't understand all in this mail (I have not too much time)
but I can certify that MF or Acu DON'T detect words in data (or paragraph
names, wich is less frequent) USED (twice ?) in a program.
In this case, TC don't compile without message for why some years ago
I had uses OC in order (in a first time)  to know where is/are the error(s) ...
Please, don't change that or we can "going in the wall" !

About OO, it's very interesting to read the documentation of Perl
about "Objects" ... it seems to me that if someone like a OO compiler
it can buy it on the market, if one is working.

If Sergey may test his (bad) programs with all the compilers on the market
for why he wish to use OC ? Just in order to write that something not work ?
(no more comments about, buth someones are paid in order to destroy Open-Source)

best regards,
Alain Lucari (Eurlix)

This email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
for problems?  Stop!  Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
searching your log files as easy as surfing the  web.  DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
open-cobol-list mailing list

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]