Xref: utzoo comp.lang.ada:2776 comp.lang.misc:3588
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!wugate!uunet!ncrlnk!ncrcae!hubcap!billwolf%hazel.cs.clemson.edu
From: billwolf%hazel.cs.clemson.edu@hubcap.clemson.edu (William Thomas Wolfe, 2847 )
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: COBOL (Was: Modernizing Ada; now moving to comp.lang.misc)
Message-ID: <6783@hubcap.clemson.edu>
Date: 15 Oct 89 17:44:42 GMT
References: <2431@munnari.oz.au>
Sender: news@hubcap.clemson.edu
Reply-To: billwolf%hazel.cs.clemson.edu@hubcap.clemson.edu
Lines: 16
Followups-To: comp.lang.misc

From ok@cs.mu.oz.au (Richard O'Keefe):
> COBOL has changed *dramatically* with time.  Successive COBOL standards
> have not merely added new things (like nested programs, terminators on
> compound statements, new statements) but have also discarded old things
> (like the ALTER statement).  

   Oh, come on.  How about recursion?  How about generics?  How about
   multitasking?  Are you seriously suggesting that COBOL has made more
   than a shabby pretense of keeping up with the technology of software
   engineering?  These are band-aids, which totally disregard the many
   fundamental problems that COBOL has been steadfastly ignoring for decades.  

   (Followups to comp.lang.misc...)

   
   Bill Wolfe, wtwolfe@hubcap.clemson.edu