From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 109fba,ef0074ec236ba6e3 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 108717,ef0074ec236ba6e3 X-Google-Attributes: gid108717,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,ef0074ec236ba6e3 X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,ef0074ec236ba6e3 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,b19fa62fdce575f9 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1994-12-11 06:31:11 PST Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.programming,comp.lang.c++,comp.object Path: bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!agate!dog.ee.lbl.gov!newshub.nosc.mil!news!mshapiro From: mshapiro@nosc.mil (Michael D Shapiro) Subject: COBOL origin (was Re: Why don't large companies use Ada?) Message-ID: <1994Nov30.221351.2917@nosc.mil> Sender: news@nosc.mil Organization: NCCOSC RDT&E Division, San Diego, CA References: <3aa7jo$7j@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM> <3be9as$jrh@felix.seas.gwu.edu> <1994Nov29.182445.6678@eos.arc.nasa.gov> Distribution: usa Date: Wed, 30 Nov 1994 22:13:51 GMT Xref: bga.com comp.lang.ada:8502 comp.lang.c:34230 comp.programming:5775 comp.lang.c++:40518 comp.object:9703 Date: 1994-11-30T22:13:51+00:00 List-Id: In article <1994Nov29.182445.6678@eos.arc.nasa.gov>, IanMaclure wrote: >mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu (Michael Feldman) writes: > >>In article , >>Robert I. Eachus wrote: > >>> About six months ago I had to research part of the history of the >>>first DoD developed portable high-level language. It is called COBOL. >>>;-) > >>Jean Sammet and others who were on the original CODASYL committee swear >>that COBOL was _not_ "DoD-developed", rather that DoD was one of many >>players involved. Obviously DoD had an interest in COBOL, but can not >>be said to have "commissioned" or funded COBOL in the sense that they >>did with Ada. > >I'm trying to remember what Admiral Grace Hopper said about COBOL but all >I can remember is that she felt a certain amount of proprietary pride in it. >She did specifically mention that she had some of the ratings ( thats enlisted >types ) in her organization produce a compiler at one point. >COBOL may have originated with the Navy perhaps with her office? >And yes COBOL cannot be said to have evolved like Ada, of course if the >space program had "evolved" like Ada there'd still be flame wars over whether >or not to put windows in the capsules and an actual launch would be years >away. The story, as I recall, is that the computer makers, each of which had a commercial programming language, could not get together for fear of antitrust suits. To get around the hurdle and come up with a common business-oriented language, some "they" decided that the U.S. government could convene a conference on data systems languages to discuss the problem. The task was assigned to the Navy, the most scientifically advanced government agency at the time (late 1950s) and the job of calling the conference and coordinating the work went to the group with Grace Hopper. Later she managed the team that developed the COBOL validation process, later transfered to NIST. COBOL did evolve, of course. The 1960 standard served as a starting point and many companies built language processors based on it, with their own extensions. By the time of the 1974 standard, people were really starting to think of actually standardizing and the Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS) specifying four levels of the language helped get rid of many idiosyncrasies. Companies continued to "improve" it, adding newer programming constructs. Another standard appeared in 1985. One problem many people have with Ada is that it was not allowed to evolve in the same way most other languages did. This lack of incremental improvements has meant that new paradigms cannot be handled easily, requiring instead a massive step that still won't turn out right in the view of many. This view of a language, frozen in time, may be wonderful for the managers of huge programs, but it turns many programmers off. -- Michael D. Shapiro, Ph.D. Internet: mshapiro@nosc.mil Code 4123, NCCOSC RDT&E Division (NRaD) San Diego CA 92152 Voice: (619) 553-4080 FAX: (619) 553-4808 DSN: 553-4080