Slashdot Mirror


3 Open Source Projects For Modern COBOL Development (opensource.com)

An anonymous reader writes: While Grace Hopper's contributions to computing are remembered, celebrated, and built upon by her successors, COBOL itself is often dismissed as a relic of earlier era of computing. To a certain extent, that is true. Most of the COBOL being written today is for maintaining legacy code, not starting new projects. However, the language is still being updated, with COBOL 2014 being the most recent standard for the language, and there are still plenty of opportunities to apply for jobs that require COBOL experience. In an article on Opensource.com, Joshua Allen Holm highlights three open source projects that are keeping the language alive.

75 comments

  1. Like they say... by pla · · Score: 5, Funny

    "A modern computer without Cobol and Fortran is like a chocolate cake without the ketchup and mustard"

    (Source unknown).

    1. Re:Like they say... by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 1

      You shouldn't make fun of the Lords of Cobol or you'll be ejected from the Twelve Colonies and banished to an abandoned asteroid with only a malfunctioning daggit for company.

    2. Re:Like they say... by morgauxo · · Score: 1

      I've never even used Cobol or Fortran but that kind of makes me want to find or a chocolate cake recipee that actually uses those things and yet comes out good. Just to be difficult that way.

  2. COBOL is forever by Hydrated+Wombat · · Score: 1
    1. Re:COBOL is forever by GrumpySteen · · Score: 4, Funny

      So is herpes. Doesn't mean you should embrace either one.

    2. Re:COBOL is forever by darkonc · · Score: 1

      Yes, but -- like a well paying job, there are some Herpes carriers that your occasional programmer would be more than happy to embrace.

      --
      Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.
  3. Microfocus Visual [Object] COBOL by BaronM · · Score: 1

    Yes, Visual COBOL is a real thing: http://www.microfocus.com/downloads/visual-cobol-23-datasheet-215624.aspx

    According to MF, '...supports Cloud, mobile, .NET and JVM, and a wide range of the latest environments.", so go out there and build your next Web 11.0 (we're up to that by now, right?) app in COBOL*

    * MF is not responsible for any resulting substance abuse or psychiatric issues you may experience

    1. Re:Microfocus Visual [Object] COBOL by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 1

      Yes, Visual COBOL is a real thing: http://www.microfocus.com/down...

      Just curious, is Microfocus still run covertly by satan as a means of torturing its clients, or has he gone public about his role?

  4. What Do Cobol jobs pay ??? by pollarda · · Score: 1

    I've often wondered if jobs for more obscure languages (such as Cobol) pay more. Any idea what a Cobol programming job typically pays compared to a C/C++ job?

    1. Re:What Do Cobol jobs pay ??? by dmbasso · · Score: 1

      Note that these jobs pay more not because of the rare expertise required, but for the suffering and mental damage they inflict!

      --
      `echo $[0x853204FA81]|tr 0-9 ionbsdeaml`@gmail.com
    2. Re:What Do Cobol jobs pay ??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      COBOL does pay a lot, but the posts are very rare and in fields the average C/C++/VB coder never gets to touch, i.e. legacy financial batch processing. Plus the locations are invariably corporate headquarters where the mainframes are located.

    3. Re:What Do Cobol jobs pay ??? by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      From what I know, they pay more as there are fewer qualified applicants around. However, while there are some legacy systems, most of them are slowly being replaced with more modern ones. "Slowly" is the operative word here. Normally, the systems are being scheduled to be replaced around the retirement of the COBOL programmers that maintain them.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    4. Re:What Do Cobol jobs pay ??? by nitehawk214 · · Score: 2

      Depends on what you think your soul is worth.

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    5. Re:What Do Cobol jobs pay ??? by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1

      I can't give you numbers, but my next door neighbor does COBOL consulting. He just remodeled his already-nice house and bought a convertible.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    6. Re:What Do Cobol jobs pay ??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For a settlement agreement we had to look at old cobol and data stored on tapes. We got paid $500/hour.

    7. Re:What Do Cobol jobs pay ??? by ole_timer · · Score: 1

      For a settlement agreement we had to look at old cobol and data stored on tapes. We got paid $500/hour

      --
      nothing to see here - move along
    8. Re:What Do Cobol jobs pay ??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, but his hair probably fell out from the COBOL, causing the midlife crisis that led to the convertible.

    9. Re:What Do Cobol jobs pay ??? by jason.sweet · · Score: 1

      Plus the locations are invariably corporate headquarters where the mainframes are located.

      Why? So they do not have to carry the punch cards so far?

      Most COBOL programmers have an ocean between them and the mainframe since most of those jobs have been off-shored. I have run COBOL programs on half a dozen mainframes, and only one of them was less than a mile away.

    10. Re:What Do Cobol jobs pay ??? by nospam007 · · Score: 1

      "For a settlement agreement we had to look at old cobol and data stored on tapes. We got paid $500/hour"

      Yes, we know. An anonymous precog already warned us.

  5. Keep COBOL alive??? by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How about instead we pound a wooden stake through its heart, burn the body, salt the ashes, apply holy water, weld it into an iron urn covered with runes and annointed with the boold of seven virgins and bury it at a crossroads under a full moon?

    1. Re:Keep COBOL alive??? by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · · Score: 2

      I'm all for that, except I'll keep the seven female virgins thank you very much.

    2. Re:Keep COBOL alive??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are they going to do with a virgin though?

    3. Re:Keep COBOL alive??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      THIS IS SLASHDOT!!! The virgin he meant was you!

    4. Re:Keep COBOL alive??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where are you going to get female virgins at Slashdot? The virgins are all male.

    5. Re:Keep COBOL alive??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's just the blood of seven virgins. Which means they're probably not virgins anymore. (IfyouknowwhatImean...)

    6. Re:Keep COBOL alive??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about instead we pound a wooden stake through its heart, burn the body, salt the ashes, apply holy water, weld it into an iron urn covered with runes and annointed with the boold of seven virgins and bury it at a crossroads under a full moon?

      Hmmm, dunno if that will be enough. Better also nuke it from orbit, it's the only way to be sure.

    7. Re:Keep COBOL alive??? by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Only a prick would go there.

    8. Re:Keep COBOL alive??? by darkonc · · Score: 1
      But why? It's like replacing the Brooklyn Bridge. The thing is big, and kinda clunky and nobody would ever make something that looks like that today. ... but it's just way more expensive to replace it than it is to keep it working. That's why it's still here.

      I personally swore that I'd quite before I took on any significant programming in COBOL -- but that doesn't mean that I'd turn my nose up at someone who was willing to take on the task. As a general case, I'd apply this rule about current COBOL code:

      It's not good because it's old -- It's old because it's good.

      --
      Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.
    9. Re:Keep COBOL alive??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People who say things like this have obviously never been with a virgin. It's not fun.

  6. So you need not click the link: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    GnuCOBOL: it translates COBOL into C and GCCs it into software. I'll skip the whole COBOL stage personally.

    OpenCOBOLIDE: it's like notepad but with COBOL highlighting rules.

    NodeCOBOL: it uses GnuCOBOL to splice the generated C-code into Node.js based programs.

    These won't keep COBOL alive or anything like that, but they might serve as a way for experienced COBOL programmers to keep using their skills for things other than maintaining old awkwardly written mainframe software.

    1. Re:So you need not click the link: by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 5, Informative

      "awkwardly written mainframe software"

      Glass houses....considering how poorly written apps are, you really want to use that canard. Mainframe programmers were real programmers - not today's cut & paste hack jobs.

      FYI there's nothing wrong with using COBOL. It fills a need that other languages have not been able to fill.

    2. Re:So you need not click the link: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No language fills a need that other languages cannot because all of them compile (or are interpreted) to the same bytecode. COBOL was used to fill many business needs for a time and overhauling the systems completely to whatever Java deviant is popular right now is not seen as a viable business expense.

      As for awkwardly written, any program that is patched to fix edge cases over the course of a few years becomes awkward to understand, that is not a slight against COBOL, it is a truth about the age of the mainframe software that needs continued edge-case tweaking, and was written in COBOL.

    3. Re:So you need not click the link: by bws111 · · Score: 1

      ALL languages (purport to) fill a need that other languages cannot or they would not exist. You're not writing most of your code in assembly, are you? Remind me how you tell the C compiler that a variable contains decimal data, and that decimal instructions should be used to operate on it.

    4. Re:So you need not click the link: by don_carnage · · Score: 1

      Actually, we have a team of developers still writing code in Assembly. Insurance is a rabbit hole of technologies.

    5. Re:So you need not click the link: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > any program that is patched to fix ...

      Most program changes in the business world is because the businesses change. The program has to reflect how the particular business runs, when the business changes so must the program. In fact every business is different (except franchises) because if two happened to be the same accidentally then at least one would change to try to get a competitive edge.

      If you don't understand the difference between an indent order and a forward dated order then you probably don't understand why businesses are different, or why COBOL is used.

  7. COBOL is for LUDDITES. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Modern app appers app apps in APP languages, like AppScript and AppApp! Only LUDDITES who still use LUDDITE hardware like keyboards still use COBOL!

    Apps!

  8. Open Source ain't keeping COBOL alive... by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 2

    >> three open source projects that are keeping the language alive

    Open Source ain't keeping COBOL alive. It's IBM. If all those legacy apps could be ported off the mainframe and run at scale, they'd potentially lose billions of dollars.

  9. COBOL is still vital, whether you like it or not. by jacobsm · · Score: 2

    If all COBOL code suddenly stopped working, well, how are your stone knives and bearskin making skills? Banks, insurance companies would fail, and then goes the rest of the interconnected economy.

  10. Hair by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does anyone still doing COBOL have hair on their head?

    Not like the horseshoe ring of hair just on the sides, but like hair on the top?

    And no, a bushy beard and a baseball cap doesn't disguise the fact you are bald.

    1. Re:Hair by jfdavis668 · · Score: 1

      We hire brand new programmers straight out of college to do COBOL programming. We need to train them before they can do any real work. There is quite a culture clash with the established programmers. New ones want IDEs, old ones still put DISPLAY statements in their code to debug.

    2. Re:Hair by Passman · · Score: 2

      There is quite a culture clash with the established programmers. New ones want IDEs, old ones still put DISPLAY statements in their code to debug.

      Nah,
      DISPLAY only works for the simple stuff.
      Most old programmers use Xpediter, like god intended.

      --
      Minne-snow-da: Winter is comming...
  11. open source cobol is useless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Today cobol is a glue language for ibm tech like CICS, IMS, VSAM, DB2, etc - it has all the bindings, crud, copy books, tools, and junk to link that legacy universe together - so open source cobol is useless since it doesn't have all that stuff - no one cares about cobol, they just use it as a glue language for the ibm crud because it's well established and there are already a bazillion lines of it - no one is going to rewrite CICS transactions in python - but new development in the ibm world is mainly done with websphere and java - the old cobol code is for business logic encoded in transactions - modern stuff puts things on a message queue which is then processed by some kind of batch transactions - so cobol will always be around.

  12. *Modern* COBOL development? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's an oxymoron if I ever heard one.

    1. Re:*Modern* COBOL development? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, the "Modern Times" were about 1620-1945 - a bit earlier or later depending on what event you let them start/end with...

  13. Well, why not? by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1

    People still use Visual Basic and Java in their most recent incarnations, so why shouldn't we have modern versions of other terrible languages?

    --
    Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    1. Re:Well, why not? by obsess5 · · Score: 1

      When I got seriously interested in computers back in the late 1970s, among the first books I read were the late Daniel McCracken's books on Algol, Fortran, and his classic on COBOL. I actually used Algol (NU-ALGOL) in our file processing course at the University of Maryland (my fellow students used Fortran-66) and COBOL for our database course circa 1980 (to create and access network databases--Codasyl?). COBOL wasn't bad and certainly wasn't terrible (like Java, I'll agree!). Although my favorite languages are probably C and Scheme, I've got a healthy respect for other languages and will note, like Donald Knuth did in his response (Computing Surveys?) to Dijkstra's"Go To Statement Considered Harmful", that good programmers write good code in any language, even assembler.

      I also remember a frequent poster/COBOL evangelist on one of the USENET groups (comp.lang.c or comp.lang.unix?) back in the late 1980s who posted a *portable* 4-line COBOL program to sort a file. The sections in a COBOL program are optional and, in fairness and perhaps to the point, standard COBOL has a SORT function. In C and other languages without a standard SORT-like function, you can't simply do a "system ("sort ...")" call, because system() and sort(1) aren't available on all platforms.

      Years later, Donald Knuth wrote a literate Pascal program to do something and a couple of Unix legends famously responded with short shell scripts or whatever. I love Unix and often reach for awk(1) (which is ingrained in my brain despite having also used Python and Perl before). However, Knuth's Pascal program could be built and used on any platform with a Pascal compiler, while the respondents' scripts only worked on platforms that had the Unix tools available (GnuWin32 or Cygwin on Windows, for example)

      Now, let me get back to replacing those mercury delay lines with bubble memory ...

  14. Please... by kjs3 · · Score: 2

    No open source project is keeping Cobol alive. The Cobol world is barely aware of open source. Cobol is being kept alive by the billions of lines of code that do things like get you your paycheck or process your insurance claim every day.

  15. Now you're exaggerating. by Qbertino · · Score: 1

    People still use Visual Basic and Java in their most recent incarnations, so why shouldn't we have modern versions of other terrible languages?

    No reason to insult Cobol in such a manner and put it on one level with Visual Basic and Java.

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
  16. Re:COBOL is still vital, whether you like it or no by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

    Banks, insurance companies would fail, and then goes the rest of the interconnected economy.

    I don't think so. Banks and insurance companies mostly run on Java. They began switching away from COBOL decades ago. Few applications are still in COBOL, and even fewer of those are mission critical.

  17. Legacy, yet Lucrative by ErichTheRed · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I work in a decidedly legacy field -- airline IT. I'm not a mainframe programmer, but I do work a lot with these systems and see what it takes to care for and manage business-critical processes. I certainly wouldn't recommend learning COBOL as a primary skill these days, but having some diverse systems experience is useful. I have been very lucky and have been able to steer my IT career into very "cross-platform" companies that has given me tons of knowledge that I otherwise wouldn't have. It can't hurt to at least have some familiarity with different technology; I've gotten interviews and jobs simply because I have at least seen a few systems that employers have used and needed someone with a passing knowledge of.

    Hanging out with mainframe guys, I hear the contracting job market is actually semi-decent. It's shrinking and not stable by any means, but people who really know both systems programming and a business domain can make tons of money on contracts. The problem is that, for better or worse, companies are stuck with the mainframe for quite some time to come. Ancillary stuff is being migrated off to save on processing -- IBM leases you the hardware and charges you monthly by the MIPS to use it. However, for a lot of companies, decades of business logic is buried in the core transaction processing code. Their choices are to try to pull all this COBOL logic out into something Java-y or just keep it running. Often, keeping it running is seen as cheaper and less risky. In particular, the airline stuff I work with has layers and layers of upstream stuff relying on the base system never changing. The systems integration work that will be needed to eventually pull this stuff out into a different environment is going to be enormous when it does happen, and it will be a fun project for the right kind of insane people.

    That said, CIOs and the like are always trying to get rid of or offshore mainframe work. It's seen as legacy crusty stuff, not sexy like phone apps and the like. That contract market I talked about often has work for seasoned mainframe guys to come back and fix the disaster that HP or Tata or Infosys made when they took over mainframe operations, often the same people the company fired. There are also the "onshore hand-holders" that help the offshore guys when things get crazy. Regardless, there will always be pressure to get off the mainframe, and the workforce is retiring right now. The move will happen one day, but it will be extremely painful for some companies and industries. So, having a tiny bit of experience, even if it's "I've seen this before" kind of experience, can be useful in the long run. Not all of IT is exciting or cutting edge -- there are plenty of systems that are just -there- and just have to run.

  18. don't knock it unless you've tried it by hmadrone · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I had the typical ignorant disdain of COBOL until I actually worked with some. Over a short period of time, I developed respect for the language and for the disciplined, methodical programmers who wielded it. We could learn much from reading old COBOL programs, particularly for web forms, where a modern form of COBOL would be a lot more readable and maintainable than the krufty PHP and JS that infests the web.

    One small example is the COBOL institution of edit masks, which were invaluable for handling form input and output of things like phone numbers and credit card numbers. COBOL's edit masks were simple to use, readable and understandable, and powerful enough to cover common business cases. No modern web language has anything that approaches COBOL's elegance in this area, which is why entering your credit card on a web site is slow and tedious.

    1. Re:don't knock it unless you've tried it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      DBase maybe?

    2. Re:don't knock it unless you've tried it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You've never worked with the Progress 4GL and RDBMS have you?

      Progress had the best formatting / data enforcement that I've ever worked with.
      It's simply not possible to "buffer-overflow" using Progress.

    3. Re:don't knock it unless you've tried it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      dBase II was the best forms processing language I ever used - circa 1984.
      What went wrong?

  19. COBOL Innovation! by Bill_FFR · · Score: 1

    "GnuCOBOL GnuCOBOL (formerly known as OpenCOBOL) is a modern, open source, COBOL compiler. It works by translating COBOL code into C and compiling the code using GCC. "

  20. Oxymoron? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Modern COBOL is like Military Intelligence - it does not exist.

  21. All this hate for COBOL??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

    No single saying exemplifies IT or programming as much as this. When I was young I thought I was a hotshot and there was a gray hair telling me I'm not doing anything new. Now I'm a gray hair thinking the same thing and I've seem many things implemented and reimplemented in newer languages. It's a bit disheartening the lack of creativity. Essentially, if you don't think you can't learn anything from COBOL, you should probably get into management.

    I've learned to respect older (retired???) COBOL programmers. Many worked with fewer resources than I have on my servers and with fewer tools. It's amazing that despite having more tools, more defined methodologies and modern languages, the functionality of many programs hasn't increased by much. A lot is merely window dressing, prettier screens.

    1. Re:All this hate for COBOL??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Many worked with fewer resources than I have on my watch.

      Those RAM figure were Kilobytes, the hard disk sizes were Megabytes.

      My first programming job was on a 16Kword machine with 2x 5 Megabyte disks - 250millisec access time. We hand optimised the file layout on the disk to minimise head movement and improve run times.

    2. Re:All this hate for COBOL??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Many worked with fewer resources than I have on my watch.

      That's what gets me. I grew up messing in Basic on a tiny computer (32k ram, 16k rom, 3mhz clock), and yet I could get it to do useful work. These days I work mostly in c and c++ and I'm pretty sure a simple hello world program wouldn't fit into 32k in either of those languages. And anything that does anything vaguely useful would struggle to fit under a few 100k or a few meg at least.

  22. What about Cobol for .NET by mschaffer · · Score: 1

    COBOL for .NET is not designed for use with big iron.

    Keep COBOL weird!

  23. Re:COBOL is still vital, whether you like it or no by jacobsm · · Score: 1

    Banks, insurance companies would fail, and then goes the rest of the interconnected economy.

    I don't think so. Banks and insurance companies mostly run on Java. They began switching away from COBOL decades ago. Few applications are still in COBOL, and even fewer of those are mission critical.

    You're so wrong. Google "amount of COBOL used today" you'll see the real story.

    "IBM estimates that more than 200 billion lines of COBOL code are still being used across industries such as banking..."

  24. Re:COBOL is still vital, whether you like it or no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Banks, insurance companies would fail, and then goes the rest of the interconnected economy.

    I don't think so. Banks and insurance companies mostly run on Java. They began switching away from COBOL decades ago. Few applications are still in COBOL, and even fewer of those are mission critical.

    That would be no more than two decades there my friend, since the Y2K issue started being dealt with and Java even existed. Hate to tell you, but there is still quite a bit of COBOL code in the financial sector still doing "mission critical" tasks. Money people use the philosophy of, if it ain't broke don't fix it so we can keep profits and bonuses high. Do a quick search for COBOL programmer job and you'll find hundreds of openings, most in the financial sector.

  25. Re:COBOL is still vital, whether you like it or no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't know how far I'd go in making that assumption either way. Lots of odd things come up when you deal with legacy systems. For example, we were working to replace a "mission critical" server over the course of six months or so (among other jobs too). However, sometime in the course of that, turns out someone bumped the power button and no one noticed for at least an additional month after we did.

    On another one there was an old PC running on a desk that hadn't been used in years. No one had physically touched it for quite some time and the last guy who used it moved to another job years ago. One of the IT guys notices while doing something else, asked about it, filed the ticket and powered it off. The next day, a bunch of calls go into the desk about problems with various systems. Turns out that random PC had a server on it for something, which prevented some programs from running when it was off and ultimately cost a department a day's worth of work.

  26. Awkwardly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    COBOL is not awkwardly written. You've just warped yourself into the hivemind so horribly that you think that software must be abstracted into objects. COBOL is written in the same logic as are business processes. COBOL is an elegant and surviving solution to a challenge of translating from the language of business to the language of computers. While these modern concepts like guis and noql and object oriented programming have their purpose, they are merely distractions for business computers. There's no need for them, and GUIs are merely an input method, not a value to the class of problems that COBOL solves well.

    1. Re:Awkwardly? by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 1

      COBOL is an elegant and surviving solution to a challenge of translating from the language of business to the language of computers.

      So I presume that COBOL has keywords such as "impactful", "synergy", "touchpoint" and "empower"?

    2. Re:Awkwardly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > keywords such as "impactful", "synergy", "touchpoint" and "empower"?

      That is _not_ business, that is _marketing_, a completely different thing.

  27. Anything for a joke. by westlake · · Score: 2

    "A modern computer without Cobol and Fortran is like a chocolate cake without the ketchup and mustard"

    As Scott Colvey, a writer for The Guardian wrote in 2009, ''Cobol is to business what the combustion engine is to motoring: it has been around so long, and installed in so many places, that doing something different would be impossibly costly.''

    Eighty percent of the world's daily business transactions rely on a 59-year-old programming language called Cobol, short for "Common Business Oriented Language." Global commerce depends so much on Cobol that if its' 220 billion lines of installed code were mysteriously erased business would be catapulted back to the "B-Commerce" era.

    As in "barter."

    If you run hardware long enough, it breaks. If you run software long enough, it works. Cobol works. As the CIO of a Fortune 350 firm who requested anonymity because he didn't want to be associated with a story about Cobol, told me, "Cobol is the most extraordinarily efficient programming language ever written."

    Cobol Is Dead. Long Live Cobol!

    [Oct 2. 2014]

    1. Re:Anything for a joke. by Pseudonym · · Score: 1

      As Scott Colvey, a writer for The Guardian wrote in 2009, ''Cobol is to business what the combustion engine is to motoring: it has been around so long, and installed in so many places, that doing something different would be impossibly costly.''

      Let's see, now. The combustion engine would be extremely costly to replace, but in the mean time it's burning through non-renewable resources and irrevocably destroying the planet's life-support system. Yup, the analogy holds!

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
  28. Re:COBOL is still vital, whether you like it or no by Oligonicella · · Score: 1

    They began switching away from COBOL decades ago.

    I was working in banking wire transfer those "decades ago". Plain and simple, you are wrong. Mainframe code was thoroughly COBOL on mostly MVS systems with not a thought of migrating to other machines or languages. Wire transfer was COBOL with other code being machine dependent. Many larger banks not using mainframes for it used Tandem machinery - COBOL, Tal, Tacl, with little or no Java except some terminal interface (even then, minor).

    Few applications are still in COBOL, and even fewer of those are mission critical.

    Even more wrong.

  29. PeopleSoft generates COBOL code by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All that PeopleSoft customization results in generated COBOL, which is then compiled with MicroFocus COBOL.

  30. Re:COBOL is still vital, whether you like it or no by don_carnage · · Score: 1

    Our main policy administration system is written in COBOL along with several others. Little to no Java.

  31. Re:COBOL is still vital, whether you like it or no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And nothing of value was lost

  32. Re:COBOL is still vital, whether you like it or no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    100 billion are pointless but needed statements telling the program the next thing is stop, then runs stop

  33. I tried to guess by nickol · · Score: 1

    I tried to guess before reading. At least one of these projects should be f COBOL compiler. Yes.
    There are more FORTH implementations in the world, than useful programs, written in FORTH.

  34. and there is VB6 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There has been a significant and unending effort to get Microsoft to continue development of Visual Basic 6 (VB6) or Open Source it. Thus far neither have happened though Microsoft did break down and provide full support for VB6 in Windows 10. This ensures VB6 will be supported until 2025.