Prev: RosettaCode
Next: persisting Object Refences in COBOL
From: Anonymous on 12 Aug 2010 10:46
In article <CYadnUauzaZnPv7RnZ2dnUVZ5oidnZ2d(a)giganews.com>,
Arnold Trembley <arnold.trembley(a)att.net> wrote:
>On 8/11/2010 5:29 PM, docdwarf(a)panix.com wrote:

[snip]

>> (Either the statute of limitations has expired or someone is working in
>> COBOL-time, where code that is old enough to vote is barely proving its
>> worth.)
>>
>> DD
>>
>
>Doc, you will appreciate this. Last week I was researching some COBOL
>code for an older batch application that we are trying to retire and I
>came across a long unused COBOL program that was written in 1967 (43
>years old!).

I think I have a few neckties of similar vintage. I don't use them much,
either.

DD
From: Anonymous on 12 Aug 2010 10:49
In article <8chek1FvqiU1(a)mid.individual.net>,
Pete Dashwood <dashwood(a)removethis.enternet.co.nz> wrote:
>James Gavan wrote:

[snip]

>> Enough already ! I was at peace as I said above, now wait for that
>> response which I deemed not to send - which will be a re-hash of what
>> got lost - no quotes from e-mails, just using that rather questionable
>> memory-box I have.
>
>Shouldn't you be looking at holiday snaps?

I rarely do what folks think I should and I don't enjoy holiday snaps as
much as the ginger ones.

DD

From: Pete Dashwood on 12 Aug 2010 21:41
Arnold Trembley wrote:
> On 8/11/2010 5:29 PM, docdwarf(a)panix.com wrote:
>> (snip)
>> I use DejaNews... errrr, Google Groups. For this one I tried '"line
>> sequential" "fixed length" gavan group:comp.lang.cobol' (no
>> single-quotes but the double-quotes included) and got ten results. A sort
>> on date shows the most recent was 8 Aug 2006 and the earliest
>> 24 Sep 2000.
>
> I miss DejaNews, but google groups advanced search works pretty well.
>
>>
>> (Either the statute of limitations has expired or someone is working
>> in COBOL-time, where code that is old enough to vote is barely
>> proving its worth.)
>>
>> DD
>>
>
> Doc, you will appreciate this. Last week I was researching some COBOL
> code for an older batch application that we are trying to retire and I
> came across a long unused COBOL program that was written in 1967 (43
> years old!). I'd post samples of it, but it's still considered
> intellectual property, even though I'd rate its value as negative,
> except for entertainment purposes.

Hey! I learned COBOL in '67... doesn't have my name on it does it? :-)

Pete.

--
"I used to write COBOL...now I can do anything."


From: Arnold Trembley on 13 Aug 2010 00:00
On 8/12/2010 8:41 PM, Pete Dashwood wrote:
> Arnold Trembley wrote:
>> (snip)
>> Doc, you will appreciate this. Last week I was researching some COBOL
>> code for an older batch application that we are trying to retire and I
>> came across a long unused COBOL program that was written in 1967 (43
>> years old!). I'd post samples of it, but it's still considered
>> intellectual property, even though I'd rate its value as negative,
>> except for entertainment purposes.
>
> Hey! I learned COBOL in '67... doesn't have my name on it does it? :-)
>
> Pete.
>

I always sign my name in COBOL programs, either as the original
troublemaker or simply as the person who added the most recent bug. But
evidently the original author did not want to receive phone calls in the
middle of the night, preferring anonymity, or else the program wrote
itself.

No, this one doesn't have your name on it!

With kindest regards,

--
http://www.arnoldtrembley.com/
From: Howard Brazee on 13 Aug 2010 09:17
On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 13:41:33 +1200, "Pete Dashwood"
<dashwood(a)removethis.enternet.co.nz> wrote:

>Hey! I learned COBOL in '67... doesn't have my name on it does it? :-)

You beat me by 2 years.

--
"In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found,
than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace
to the legislature, and not to the executive department."

- James Madison
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: RosettaCode
Next: persisting Object Refences in COBOL