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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,5faad1722103f6a7 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public Path: g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!cyclone1.gnilink.net!gnilink.net!wns13feed!worldnet.att.net!207.217.77.102!elnk-nf2-pas!newsfeed.earthlink.net!stamper.news.pas.earthlink.net!newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net.POSTED!01cc3b7c!not-for-mail Reply-To: "Richard Riehle" From: "Richard Riehle" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: <7_Sxc.8670$uX2.5497@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net> Subject: Re: 7E7 Flight Controls Electronics X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 Message-ID: Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 16:07:57 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.81.221.83 X-Complaints-To: abuse@earthlink.net X-Trace: newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net 1087315677 66.81.221.83 (Tue, 15 Jun 2004 09:07:57 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 09:07:57 PDT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:1509 Date: 2004-06-15T16:07:57+00:00 List-Id: "Robert I. Eachus" wrote in message news:demdnZCSTppt91fd4p2dnA@comcast.com... > Richard Riehle wrote: > > > The data structures were consistently global, thereby making the notion of > > localization of data impossible. The fact that FORTRAN also failed to > > provide adequate scoping rules for conditional constructs does not make > > the same defect in COBOL any more acceptable. > > But there was a major difference. It was common in COBOL* in the 60's > and 70's to write what we would now make a subroutine as a Cobol > program, and use JCL to tie the various COBOL programs together to > create an application. Ah, yes. How fondly I recall those // punched cards. :-) > > Yes, I can agree that programming in JCL was painful, but that had > little to do with COBOL, and everything to do with the memory sizes on > then current machines. You couldn't fit the whole program--or whole > dataset--in memory, and you wouldn't run into thrashing, since most > machines did no have virtual memory. (Yes, I know that some 360s and > all 370s had virtual memory support, but you had to run an OS that used it.) Agreed. We so often found ourselves doing workarounds due to program size limitations, along with lots of other entertaining restrictions on the IBM OS's. This particularly frutstrating, at times, with DOS. I preferred the Burroughs OS, but it was not as popular. > Richard Riehle