Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!ll-xn!mit-eddie!bloom-beacon!athena.mit.edu!langz
From: langz@athena.mit.edu (Lang Zerner)
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: Re: The GNU Manifesto
Message-ID: <2668@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU>
Date: 30 Jan 88 05:41:08 GMT
References: <9591@tekecs.TEK.COM> <328@splut.UUCP> <3144@briar.Philips.Com> <610@gethen.UUCP> <1298@gumby.cs.wisc.edu> <2576@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> <6472@cisunx.UUCP>
Sender: daemon@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU
Reply-To: langz@athena.mit.edu (Lang Zerner)
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Lines: 23


In article <2576@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> langz@athena.mit.edu (Lang Zerner [me])
writes: 
>>
>>What's more, COBOL is without doubt the best language available for writing
>>mainframe business applications. ...  There are more mainframe business
>>applications written in COBOL ... more software maintenance engineers use
>>COBOL...

In article <6472@cisunx.UUCP> wpnst@unix.cis.pittsburgh.edu.UUCP (Bill 'Deus' Nixon) responds:>
>The only reason that COBOL is so widely used is that 70% of all business
>programs are written in it.  Why ?  Cause COBOL was the best HLL around
>at the time avaiable to alot of people and computers.  
 ^^^^^^^^^^^

In my original posting, I meant to use these very facts to support the argument
that the fact that something is prevalent does not mean it is superior.  Of
*course* COBOL is not the superior HLL.  The quote which Bill extracted should
have included smileys to indicate my intended sarcasm, and was meant to
illustrate the absurdity of the "prevalent ==> superior" claim.
Be seeing you...
--Lang Zerner      langz@athena.mit.edu    ihnp4!mit-eddie!athena.mit.edu!langz
"No one is exempt from talking nonsense; the only misfortune is to do it
 solemnly"   --Michel de Montaigne