home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: alt.cobol
- Path: sparky!uunet!pipex!mfmail!jfid
- From: jfid@mfltd.co.uk (James Fidell (x5320))
- Subject: Re: cobol
- Message-ID: <1993Jan21.133510.4271@mfltd.co.uk>
- Sender: jfid@mfltd.co.uk (James Fidell (x5320))
- Organization: Micro Focus Ltd., Newbury, UK
- References: <1993Jan13.4605.763@dosgate> <1jm43fINN8rv@mirror.digex.com>
- Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 13:35:10 GMT
- Lines: 28
-
-
- In article <1jm43fINN8rv@mirror.digex.com>, tdarcos@digex.digex.com (Paul Robinson) writes:
- > alan.popow@canrem.com ("alan popow") writes:
- > : RE: Message 760 entered on Jan 12,93 by SINARRWB to ALL
- > : ===========================================================================
- > :
- > : In general I agree with the conclusions. Use them for their strengths, but
- > : I do have to wonder about the statement above. Never? Would you seriously
- > : consider writing an o/s in COBOL? How about a mouse, video, or any other
- > : kind of external driver?
- >
- > Someone once suggested the idea of writing a Compiler in COBOL, maybe even
- > the COBOL compiler itself! On the other hand, he may have been suggesting
- > that as the idea of punishment.
- >
-
- In fact, the Micro Focus COBOL compiler (and many of the other tools) *are*
- written in COBOL. (Yes, I was gob-smacked when I found out as well :-). I
- do believe you'd have to be a masochist to want to do it, but then again,
- the compiler ports to just about any system first time, which is more than
- can be said for the C runtime.
-
- James.
- --
- "Yield to temptation -- |
- it may not pass your way again" | jfid@mfltd.co.uk
- |
- - Lazarus Long | James Fidell
-