Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!sco!rogerk
From: rogerk@sco.COM (Roger Knopf 5502)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.i386
Subject: Re: Really stupid Q?
Keywords: C vs COBOL under UNIX
Message-ID: <1083@scorn.sco.COM>
Date: 4 Jan 90 23:00:17 GMT
References: <10821@attctc.Dallas.TX.US>
Sender: news@sco.COM
Reply-To: rogerk@sco.COM (Roger Knopf 5502)
Organization: The Santa Cruz Operation, Inc.
Lines: 29


In article <10821@attctc.Dallas.TX.US> toma@attctc.Dallas.TX.US (Tom Armistead) writes:
>I have a "requirement" to provide hard facts regarding COBOL performance
>under UNIX.  I am working for a client that is building a Unix system and
>they only have COBOL programmers.  They will not accept my word on the
>fact that C is a better performer and easier to use (in UNIX).  Has anyone

I don't accept that whole, either. While C is undoubtedly faster for almost
all applications, it is not necessarily easier to use, especially if you
have only COBOL programmers on staff. Also, C may be faster but COBOL
is no slouch if it is a good compiler and there are excellent compilers
available for Unix.

>here ever seen any benchmarks between C and COBOL under UNIX or does anyone
>know of PRINTED material that specifically states why COBOL is worse than
>C on unix systems....
>
>I feel like I'm talking to a tree in trying to convince these people to
>use C for development.  Any help would be greatly appreciated!!!

C is way overblown as an applications development language. In general
it always requires additional software - a file manager and a screen
manager - to write commercial applications. COBOL has both. While I
would not necessarily choose COBOL first, or even over C, the fact
that your client already knows COBOL makes it a good choice.

Roger Knopf
SCO Consulting Services
If caught, my employer will disavow all knowledge of me or my actions....