I need a new compiler...
in [Cobol]
|
Prev: COBOL/CICS/DB2 - COBOL for MVS and compile option DYNAM -solution from 2006
Next: Still one more Overlapping operands test
From: Paul H on 17 Dec 2008 00:37 I should have added that in the late 60's the "Journal of the ACM" had an article that said something to the effect that all processing could be driven by thorough description of data structures. That's why I like COBOL so much. By describing data structures, the code needed to deal with arithmetic or logic can ignore these details. The programmer is unlikely to scribble on memory outside of his data division. No wonder more lines of COBOL code (a quarter of a trillion lines?) are in use today, with billions more written every year. And consider the number of lines of lower level language that are needed to do what single lines of COBOL do. "string" and "unstring delimited by" are good examples. I dread the flaming responses that these comments will cause. Please, just let me express my opinion without being punished. Paul "Paul H" <NoSpamphobergNoSpam(a)att.net> wrote in message news:49488b95$0$5486$bbae4d71(a)news.suddenlink.net... Wow! I have almost no idea what you guy are arguing about (maybe a little). I do understand that my comment that I want to avoid anything that seems like assembly language caused most of this. I started my career with Autocoder on an IBM 1401, then Honeywell's Easycoder, then a couple others whose names I can't remember (something on a Data general computer?) I used 8086 machine language to enable my COBOL to access serial ports, Enuf assembler!!! I conclude that no COBOL will do what I need. Maybe Clarion (I already own version 5.5), or RealBasic, if I can find a data base that stays in my target price range. Thanks for your help, everybody. Paul "Paul H" <NoSpamphobergNoSpam(a)att.net> wrote in message news:494095a5$0$5502$bbae4d71(a)news.suddenlink.net... I've been using MicroFocus Net Express for many years, but now I want to write a small application that would sell for maybe $20.00. MF would charge a run-time fee to each user, so I need to select a different Compiler. Where can I find a list of inexpensive compilers, with ratings? Does such a list exist? TIA, Paul
From: Richard on 17 Dec 2008 01:07 On Dec 17, 6:18 pm, "Paul H" <NoSpamphobergNoS...(a)att.net> wrote: > Wow! I have almost no idea what you guy are arguing about (maybe a little). > I do understand that my comment that I want to avoid anything that seems > like assembly language caused most of this. > I started my career with Autocoder on an IBM 1401, then Honeywell's > Easycoder, then a couple others whose names I can't remember (something on a > Data general computer?) I used 8086 machine language to enable my COBOL to > access serial ports, Enuf assembler!!! > > I conclude that no COBOL will do what I need. As your only specified criteria were 'no run-time fees' and 'inexpensive' then OpenCobol and COBOL-IT can meet these 100%. If you want to use a Microfocus ADIS type user interface, ie screen section then apparently OpenCobol and COBOl-IT will do this too. They will also give file sharing and record locking. COBOL-IT does have an animator style debugger. What other requirements do you have that these do not meet ? > Maybe Clarion (I already own > version 5.5), or RealBasic, if I can find a data base that stays in my > target price range. PostgreSQL MySQL SQLLite FireBird http://www.freebyte.com/programming/database/#opensourcedatabases > Thanks for your help, everybody. > > Paul > > "Paul H" <NoSpamphobergNoS...(a)att.net> wrote in message > > news:494095a5$0$5502$bbae4d71(a)news.suddenlink.net... > I've been using MicroFocus Net Express for many years, but now I want to > write a small application that would sell for maybe $20.00. MF would charge > a run-time fee to each user, so I need to select a different Compiler. > Where can I find a list of inexpensive compilers, with ratings? Does such a > list exist? TIA, Paul
From: William M. Klein on 17 Dec 2008 01:19 Paul H, Wasn't the answer of using OpenCOBOL, the one that would actually provide you with what you want? -- Bill Klein wmklein <at> ix.netcom.com "Paul H" <NoSpamphobergNoSpam(a)att.net> wrote in message news:49488b95$0$5486$bbae4d71(a)news.suddenlink.net... > Wow! I have almost no idea what you guy are arguing about (maybe a little). > I do understand that my comment that I want to avoid anything that seems > like assembly language caused most of this. > > I started my career with Autocoder on an IBM 1401, then Honeywell's > Easycoder, then a couple others whose names I can't remember (something on a > Data general computer?) I used 8086 machine language to enable my COBOL to > access serial ports, Enuf assembler!!! > > I conclude that no COBOL will do what I need. Maybe Clarion (I already own > version 5.5), or RealBasic, if I can find a data base that stays in my > target price range. > > Thanks for your help, everybody. > > Paul > > "Paul H" <NoSpamphobergNoSpam(a)att.net> wrote in message > news:494095a5$0$5502$bbae4d71(a)news.suddenlink.net... > I've been using MicroFocus Net Express for many years, but now I want to > write a small application that would sell for maybe $20.00. MF would charge > a run-time fee to each user, so I need to select a different Compiler. > Where can I find a list of inexpensive compilers, with ratings? Does such a > list exist? TIA, Paul >
From: Anonymous on 17 Dec 2008 08:39 In article <gi94kb1qt9(a)news2.newsguy.com>, Michael Wojcik <mwojcik(a)newsguy.com> wrote: >docdwarf(a)panix.com wrote: >> In article <gi63hm324ng(a)news7.newsguy.com>, >> Michael Wojcik <mwojcik(a)newsguy.com> wrote: >>> docdwarf(a)panix.com wrote: >>>> If C, in fact, does *not* 'provide low-level access to memory' ... >>> >>> ISO 9899-1999 is, of course, the authoritive source; but the >>> comp.lang.c FAQ would also have cleared up this misconception. >> >> I have found something calling it'sself the comp.lang.c FAQ at >> http://c-faq.com/ . This leads me to a section about pointers, >> http://c-faq.com/ptrs/index.html , and that leads me to a question about >> 'what is the difference between arrays and pointers' >> http://c-faq.com/aryptr/practdiff.html . From that page: >> >> --begin quoted text: >> >> A pointer is a reference to any data element (of a particular type) >> anywhere. >> >> --end quoted text [snip] >> Now... if the reference provided by a pointer is one towards low-level >> memory (a sub-set of 'anywhere') > >If it is. But it may not be, since there are many other subsets of >"anywhere". The quoted text doesn't say that pointers could be >constructed to point to anywhere; it says the object referred to by >the pointer could be anywhere. Mr Wojcik, my eyes are not what they used to be... the reference I supply states 'any data element (of a particular type)', not 'object'. If there is another reference which states 'an object, and only an object, is 'any data element (of a particular type)'' then your point is valid... if not then other conclusions might not only be possible, but valid. As I stated earlier... things might have changed in the decades since I was taught about this. DD
From: Anonymous on 17 Dec 2008 08:42
In article <49488b95$0$5486$bbae4d71(a)news.suddenlink.net>, Paul H <NoSpamphobergNoSpam(a)att.net> wrote: >Wow! I have almost no idea what you guy are arguing about (maybe a little). Welcome to the club, Mr Hoberg... now, try not to get beaten too severely with it! DD |