Re: Answering an Ada/COBOL Question

[Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-deja.com>]

In article <80piek$rd3$1@nntp1.atl.mindspring.net>,
  Richard D Riehle <laoXhai@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> One of the real tragedies is that so much software that ought
> to be developed in the current version of COBOL is being
> developed in C.

Actually I think this is a rather small section of the market,
I don't often run into C or C++ in COBOL type environments
(smalltalk is for example more popular in this environment).

The notion that COBOL is dead is another remarkable myth that
you fine. About a year ago, I talked to a very high up official
in the DoD who was in a position of considerable influence
regarding DoD fiscal applications.

He presented as received knowledge the idea that only the DoD
was still using COBOL, and that all commercial companies had
abandoned COBOL long ago. I was too taken aback to have any
idea how to react to this absolutely amazing point of view.

When we developed Realia COBOL in the 1980's for the PC, we
expected the market to be offloaded maintenance of existing
COBOL applications on mainframes. We were surprised to find
that the major market was (and still is by the way) development
of new COBOL applications to be deployed on PC's (it is possible
these days to run JCL, BAL, CICS, etc on PC's, so the entire
mainframe environment can be replicated).


> In part, this is the fault of the compiler publishers.  One
popular
> COBOL compiler publisher, used by a colleague of mine here in
Silicon
> Valley, has been notoriously unresponsive in its support.  One
thing
> about programming in C.  You do not have to rely as much on
your
> compiler publisher for support.  The same can be said for
assembler.
>
> >I don't hold that view. Many people (inside *and* outside
academia) hold
> >this view of Ada. I'd suspect that if you polled Silicon
Valley more than
> >90% of the programmers just know that Ada sucks.
>
> I suspect the percentage is slightly higher.  When I attend a
function
> here, wearing a badge that says, "AdaWorks," I can count on
getting
> questions such as, "I thought that language died a long time
ago." Ada
> is considered to be the COBOL of the 80's by many programmers
in this
> neighborhood. "It is big, slow, obsolete, and not worth much
consideration.
> On top of that, it is a military language, designed by
committee so it
> can't be any good for commercial programming."
>
> Fortunately, we are seeing some change in that view.  Robert
would be
> amused to learn that some of those who are adopting a positive
view
> of Ada are not adopting Ada.  Instead, they are programming in
GNAT.
>
> Richard Riehle
> http://www.adaworks.com
>
>


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.