Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!ames!ucsd!ucsdhub!hp-sdd!hplabs!hpda!hpsemc!gph
From: gph@hpsemc.HP.COM (Migration Engineer)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: C/IBM
Message-ID: <810007@hpsemc.HP.COM>
Date: 30 Jun 88 17:29:48 GMT
References: <16282@brl-adm.ARPA>
Organization: HP Technology Access Center, Cupertino, CA
Lines: 33

gallen@apollo.uucp (Gary Allen) writes:

->In article <16316@brl-adm.ARPA> PAAAAAR%CALSTATE.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu writes:
->>Both (Root Boy) Jim Cottrell    <rbj@icst-cmr.arpa>
->>and  Chuck_M_Grandgent@cup.portal.com
->>have recently had the courage to praise COBOL.
->>
->>I agree with them.  COBOL and Cwere both developed by programmers for p
->[......]
->If COBOL (or for that matter BASIC or FORTRAN) is the answer, I really
->don't have any interest in the question!! What a snob, huh?
->[......]
-->>>both C and COBOL have been used for operating systems and compilers!
            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
->Let me guess, A reverse Polish BASIC interpreter with 80 column input
->on punched cards, right?                            

->>Trouble is many people don't learn clever COBOL.
                                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^
                                    Oxymoronic!!
etc.

    Gary, you made you point, and I agree with it.  COBOL and C are 
    designed for different purposes.

    However, your response is rude and obnoxious.  Didn't your parents
    teach you any manners?   Do you think the rest of us enjoy reading
    material like the above?  I don't.  I also don't see why a
    discussion about compilers has to turn into an emotional temper
    tantrum.


					    - gph