Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!codonics!bret
From: bret@codonics.COM (Bret Orsburn)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: CALL FOR DISCUSSION: comp.lang.cobol
Keywords: COBOL, Dead Language
Message-ID: <431@codonics.COM>
Date: 23 Nov 89 12:49:07 GMT
References: <480@enea.se> <1989Nov21.013021.4170@eng.umd.edu> <3304@cbnewsd.ATT.COM>
Reply-To: bret@codonics.UUCP (Bret Orsburn)
Distribution: na
Organization: Codonics, Inc., Middleburg Heights, OH
Lines: 24

In article <3304@cbnewsd.ATT.COM> popeye@cbnewsd.ATT.COM (ken.a.irwin) writes:
>[...] And since all
>the chip makers tell us how great RISC technology is, why is it that 
>COBOL, the languge that most closly matches the RISC instruction set, is
>so frowned upon? 

Huh?

And elsewhere in the same posting asserts:
>COBOL is english language assembly [...]

and again, huh?

[I will not flame, I will not flame, I will not flame,...] :->

Wait! I get it! This is some gifted satirist's *impression* of a COBOL
programmer!

[I flamed!] :-<
-- 

bret@codonics.com
uunet!codonics!bret
Bret Orsburn