A GCC COBOL status report

Posted Feb 10, 2023 16:34 UTC (Fri) by adobriyan (subscriber, #30858)
In reply to: A GCC COBOL status report by NightMonkey
Parent article: A GCC COBOL status report

Does it have generics?

A GCC COBOL status report

Posted Feb 10, 2023 21:00 UTC (Fri) by dcg (subscriber, #9198) [Link] (3 responses)

Not sure if you are joking, but latest versions of cobol actually have generics... https://www.codeproject.com/Articles/56232/Enforced-Type-...

A GCC COBOL status report

Posted Feb 10, 2023 22:01 UTC (Fri) by atai (subscriber, #10977) [Link] (1 responses)

so gcobol still has catch up to do (as it is only in 1965)

A GCC COBOL status report

Posted Feb 10, 2023 22:02 UTC (Fri) by atai (subscriber, #10977) [Link]

sorry I meant 1985

A GCC COBOL status report

Posted Feb 13, 2023 13:08 UTC (Mon) by pbonzini (subscriber, #60935) [Link]

Oh my God, that is insane. COBOL-85 finally made it possible to use structured programming as you would in other languages(*), and it had some virtues for what it was meant to do (batch processing on flat file databases, essentially). But now it's become essentially Java with a 1950s syntax?

(*) though some people, including my father, were worried that having loop bodies inside the PERFORM statements would cause too deep indentation, and preferred to keep those out of line!