Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!mailrus!ames!attctc!vector!holston!barton
From: barton@holston.UUCP (Barton A. Fisk)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Call  for Discussion: alt.cobol
Summary: COBOL, COBOL, where's the comp.lang.cobol ?????
Message-ID: <5648@holston.UUCP>
Date: 26 Nov 89 19:24:44 GMT
References: <5301@garfield.MUN.EDU> <1989Nov25.193310.20967@world.std.com>
Organization: Barton A. Fisk & Co.
Lines: 27

> 
> There's at least one Cobol for Unix, it's called "RM Cobol" (I am
> *not* making this up), and they never understand the snickers as we
> walk by their booth at trade shows.
> 
I for one use RM (Ryan McFarland) Cobol (snicker, snicker) and
LIKE IT!

> Are there at least several people who will stand up and say "I am a
> Cobol programmer and would benefit personally from this group" rather
> than the current spate of "I've known some Cobol programmers and
> they're not bad folks...wouldn't let my daughter marry one though..."

I maintain a large volume of Cobol code, I make money (you know, the
green stuff) from Cobol and would probably benefit, post and otherwise
use the proposed Cobol group to further my knowledge of the subject.

I also use other languages when they would do the job better and/or
faster. In my own humble opinion, anytime one becomes wedded to or
violently against a particular language or for that matter, operating
system, becomes the loser.

-- 
Barton A. Fisk          | UUCP: {attctc,texbell}vector!holston!barton
PO Box 1781             | (PSEUDO) DOMAIN: barton@holston.UUCP     
Lake Charles, La. 70602 | ----------------------------------------
318-439-5984            | "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone"-JC