COBOL "non-myth" confirmed - Index and subscripts (MF on Windows)
in [Cobol]
|
Prev: Help with Tcal
Next: COBOL Error Handling (was: What MF says about ROUNDED(was:Cobol Myth Busters
From: Howard Brazee on 21 Sep 2007 16:23 On Sat, 22 Sep 2007 02:29:21 +1200, "Pete Dashwood" <dashwood(a)removethis.enternet.co.nz> wrote: >I remember coding COBOL before there was a PICTURE clause (It was the COBOL >59 compiler). We used SIZE, CLASS, and USAGE to achieve the same result. I >also remember being able to write OTHERWISE in an IF statement... happy >days...:-) I used to use OTHERWISE, but my first compiler had the brand new PICTURE feature. I don't know of another optional feature that took over as rapidly as that one.
From: HeyBub on 21 Sep 2007 17:16 Judson McClendon wrote: > The culprit said she didn't understand how my design > worked, so she threw mine away and redid it without telling anyone. I'm > still proud of > myself for avoiding homicide at that point. :-) > > I don't remember if she used indexes or subscripts. ;-) Possibly neither: IF OP-CODE = 'A' MOVE TAX-RATE(1) TO MYTAX ELSE IF OP-CODE = 'B' MOVE TAX-RATE(2) TO MYTAX ....
From: Charles Hottel on 21 Sep 2007 19:32 "Judson McClendon" <judmc(a)sunvaley0.com> wrote in message news:hkUIi.55646$Y7.13950(a)bignews3.bellsouth.net... > "Charles Hottel" <chottel(a)earthlink.net> wrote: >> ... >> It is not always possible to tell the future and code for the most >> general case. ... > > You're right, but I try very hard to do it. I've been saved many times, > and > come out smelling like a rose, because of careful forethought. In the 70's > I designed a Criminal Justice system for the local county. In one area > there > was a case number that was 8 numeric digits. I thought "Oh, yeah, they're > definitely going to make that sucker bigger at some point, so I'll head > 'em > off at the pass" and built a 12 character alphanumeric case number into > the new system. About five years later, the courts decided they wanted a > 15 character case number. Sigh. > > Last I heard, the system is still running, though probably modified beyond > recognition by now. Don't you love it when some incompetent dolt does a > complete rewrite on one of your programs, leaving only your name as the > author? :-) No kidding, I once had someone do a whole system of mine > like that. I didn't know it until about three years later when a > programmer > working on it asked me why a certain program did such-and-such. I told > him it didn't, and when he showed me the listing, it was not remotely like > what I had designed or written. He said he had been wondering why I had > written such crummy code. I learned that the user department had been > mumbling behind my back about what a crummy system I had written for > them. I didn't blame them, but did set them straight about who did what, > and fortunately had my original design and listings as proof. I had been > pulled off the system for another project just before completion. The > culprit said she didn't understand how my design worked, so she threw > mine away and redid it without telling anyone. I'm still proud of myself > for > avoiding homicide at that point. :-) > > I don't remember if she used indexes or subscripts. ;-) > -- > Judson McClendon judmc(a)sunvaley0.com (remove zero) > Sun Valley Systems http://sunvaley.com > "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that > whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life." > From now on I am only using inscripts and subdexes. If that gets past Robert's aluminum foil it should give him quite a headache, but unfortunately probably not the one he deserves ;-)
From: Charles Hottel on 21 Sep 2007 19:34 "Judson McClendon" <judmc(a)sunvaley0.com> wrote in message news:FmUIi.55648$Y7.19018(a)bignews3.bellsouth.net... > "Pete Dashwood" <dashwood(a)removethis.enternet.co.nz> wrote: >> >> ... >> I can assure you I am a very multi-faceted person and no particular >> generalization is going to be totally accurate. ... > > Even "a very multi-faceted person?" ;-) > > Sorry, Pete, I just couldn't resist. :-) > -- > Judson McClendon judmc(a)sunvaley0.com (remove zero) > Sun Valley Systems http://sunvaley.com > "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that > whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life." > It is worse than I imagined, I though he was only "two faced" ;-)
From: Pete Dashwood on 21 Sep 2007 19:48
"Charles Hottel" <chottel(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message news:13f8l5at83iq141(a)corp.supernews.com... > > "Judson McClendon" <judmc(a)sunvaley0.com> wrote in message > news:FmUIi.55648$Y7.19018(a)bignews3.bellsouth.net... >> "Pete Dashwood" <dashwood(a)removethis.enternet.co.nz> wrote: >>> >>> ... >>> I can assure you I am a very multi-faceted person and no particular >>> generalization is going to be totally accurate. ... >> >> Even "a very multi-faceted person?" ;-) >> >> Sorry, Pete, I just couldn't resist. :-) >> -- >> Judson McClendon judmc(a)sunvaley0.com (remove zero) >> Sun Valley Systems http://sunvaley.com >> "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that >> whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life." >> > > It is worse than I imagined, I though he was only "two faced" ;-) > If I had two, I wouldn't be using the one I am. Pete. -- "I used to write COBOL...now I can do anything." |