Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!apple!sun-barr!decwrl!decvax!ima!compilers-sender
From: juliar@hpcll17.HP.COM (Julia Rodriguez)
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Subject: Re: Translating Algol to C or Cobol
Message-ID: <4041@ima.ima.isc.com>
Date: 6 Jun 89 17:05:45 GMT
References: <539@sjfc.UUCP>
Sender: compilers-sender@ima.ima.isc.com
Reply-To: juliar@hpcll17.HP.COM (Julia Rodriguez)
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Calif. Language Lab
Lines: 31
Approved: compilers@ima.UUCP

>/ deh0654@sjfc.UUCP (Dennis E. Hamilton) /  5:03 pm  May 16, 1989 /

>a tough bet to make.  The translation to COBOL is even more limited,
>of course, since COBOL has no concept of local data at all, and the
>only form of dynamic data binding COBOL supports is the limited case of
>parameter passing.  You might as well translate to FORTRAN.  COBOL
>doesn't support pointers, so it provides little comfort as a way to fake
>ALGOL notions in the disguise of other constructs that are available.
>In no case would I expect a translation of ALGOL to COBOL to be
>intelligible to a human programmer, ...

Just a couple of corrections in regard to COBOL.  The 85 standard 
(ANSI X2.23-1985) added several facilities to COBOL.  Among them are: 
nested programs, global data, and external data.  COBOL does have the
concept of local/global data.  It does support dynamic data binding other 
than parameter passing.

It is true that COBOL does not support pointers.

I do not think that a translation to COBOL would be less intelligible than
a translation to C.  Automated translations are rarely intelligible in any
case.

Julia Rodriguez
X3J4 member
[From juliar@hpcll17.HP.COM (Julia Rodriguez)]
--
Send compilers articles to compilers@ima.isc.com or, perhaps, Levine@YALE.EDU
Plausible paths are { decvax | harvard | yale | bbn}!ima
Please send responses to the originator of the message -- I cannot forward
mail accidentally sent back to compilers.  Meta-mail to ima!compilers-request