Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!ssbell!mcmi!dsndata!wayne From: wayne@dsndata.uucp (Wayne Schlitt) Newsgroups: news.groups Subject: Re: Call for Discussion: alt.cobol Message-ID: Date: 30 Nov 89 19:09:00 GMT References: <5301@garfield.MUN.EDU> <1989Nov25.193310.20967@world.std.com> <1989Nov28.162054.25166@mcmi.uucp> Sender: wayne@dsndata.UUCP Organization: Design Data Lines: 24 In-reply-to: denny@mcmi.uucp's message of 28 Nov 89 16:20:54 GMT In article <1989Nov28.162054.25166@mcmi.uucp> denny@mcmi.uucp (Denny Page) writes: > [ ... ] > > I think that Cobol under Unix is much more widespread than people on > the Net are able to consider without lapsing into coma. > > Anybody wanna start a discussion of how extensively Basic is still used? > > Dislaimer: I do not use or know Cobol ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ no, but i know for a fact that, like our site, denny's site uses cobol quite heavily. :-> yes, i think cobol under unix is _much_ more common than many people think. while i am admitting things, we also use basic. we also use C, pascal, assembler and a few other languages. each have their uses and each have their draw backs. i would vote yes for a cobol news group. -wayne Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com