Re: cobol compiler/gui dev enviroment
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 10/23/07 22:11, Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2007 at 08:34:15PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
>> On 10/23/07 20:08, David Fox wrote:
>>> On 10/23/07, Chris Parker <chris_parker@adelphia.net> wrote:
>>>> Hello all,
>>>>
>>>> Does anyone know of a good cobol compiler and gui development
>>>> enviroment? I have seen open-cobol as a compiler, but was wondering if
>>>> anyone has any other recommendations?
>>>
>>> I've not yet heard of an open cobol, seems that it might be
>>> interesting. Last I checked, there was
>>> a tiny cobol compiler that I got somewhere on the net but don't have
>>> it anymore and can't remember where I got it.
>> Correct. COBOL* is so complicated a language, and so anti-geeky,
>> that no one has really had an itch to create a full COBOL
>> environment. You'll have to pony up the coin for a commercial compiler.
>>
>> * And it's soulmate PL/I.
>
> 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.
> 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.
- --
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA USA
Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day.
Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFHH0eYS9HxQb37XmcRAkLcAKCmPQvqi+eXwrGEcEmNF677YnaSjwCff9m9
fO9zG2lsHlzZp7gh4FLvp0c=
=1lPS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: