Slashdot Mirror


Do You Know Cobol? If So, There Might Be a Job for You. (wsj.com)

Despite its advanced age, Cobol is still the most prevalent programming language in the financial-services industry world-wide. Software programmed in Cobol powers millions of banking transactions every day and underpins critical computer mainframes. WSJ: And Cobol isn't going away anytime soon. Banks and other companies have come to the uncomfortable realization that ripping out old mainframes is pricey and complicated. Transitioning to new systems is likely to take years, and besides, a lot of the older tech works just fine. The problem is that Cobol isn't popular with new programmers. So, with a generation of Cobol specialists retiring, there is a continuing hunt to find a new generation of programmers to service this technology. In Texas, Mr. Hinshaw's (an anecdote in the story) company, the Cobol Cowboys, a group of mostly older programmers, is training U.S. military veterans in the programming language. Accenture is coaching hundreds of Cobol programmers every year in India and the Philippines to work at banks. In Malaysia, one consultancy that provides engineers versed in Cobol for its clients, iTAc MSC Outsourcing, has adopted the slogan "Keeping the Dinosaurs Alive." A host of companies offer online courses in Cobol in places like South Africa, India and Bangladesh. Developing economies are key technology-outsourcing centers for banks. Further reading: Major Banks and Parts of Federal Gov't Still Rely On COBOL, Now Scrambling To Find IT 'Cowboys' To Keep Things Afloat.

335 comments

  1. Wow, it's like Code Talkers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Someday, they will die out but for now they have a use!

    1. Re:Wow, it's like Code Talkers by Dzimas · · Score: 1

      Someday, they will die out but for now they have a use!

      The same can be said for *any* technical skill.

    2. Re: Wow, it's like Code Talkers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Y2k2 more like it. If the date of this article was 1999 I would be more inclined to think it was true.

      However the reality is that C, FORTRAN and COBOL are the only languages needed, and most everything else is unnecessary when speed (on old hardware) is the bottleneck.

    3. Re: Wow, it's like Code Talkers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's the last time I messed with Cobol

    4. Re: Wow, it's like Code Talkers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have used Cobol since 1960s and Is really easy. I even developed a Cobol programming Generator that generates complete Cobol programs in minutes using parameters. You can add routines for many financial calculations and perform them easily. Sixmorgo@gmail
      com.

  2. Seriously? by SCVonSteroids · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sure I'll go ahead and learn what I need to to keep your stack afloat.
    What's that? You don't want to pay me a reasonable wage? Well then! I guess we have a problem indeed. Scramble on, fine HR folks at "Major Banks and Parts of Federal Gov't"!

    --
    I tend to rant.
    1. Re:Seriously? by quarrel · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Exactly this.

      COBOL isn't hard. Whatever, it's a language.

      But if you want to take smart people away from their shiny modern languages and dev stacks, and ask them to put up with bureaucracy, then you need to pay them at least commensurate salaries to what they'd get elsewhere (if not MORE).

      These are really stories about banks not wanting to pay talented devs to put up with their BS.

    2. Re:Seriously? by pgmrdlm · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I remember y2k bug. Cobol programmers brought down serious money. When there are no other cobol programmers, there will be serious money for them again. Do you know how many MILLIONS of lines of code there is still in cobol?
      hink COBOL is dead? About 95 percent of ATM swipes use COBOL code, Reuters reported in April, and the 58-year-old language even powers 80 percent of in-person transactions. In fact, Reuters calculates that thereâ(TM)s still 220 billion lines of COBOL code currently being used in production today, and that every day, COBOL systems handle $3 trillion in commerce. Back in 2014, the prevalence of COBOL drew some concern from the trade newspaper American Banker.hink COBOL is dead? About 95 percent of ATM swipes use COBOL code, Reuters reported in April, and the 58-year-old language even powers 80 percent of in-person transactions. In fact, Reuters calculates that thereâ(TM)s still 220 billion lines of COBOL code currently being used in production today, and that every day, COBOL systems handle $3 trillion in commerce. Back in 2014, the prevalence of COBOL drew some concern from the trade newspaper American Banker.
      That is from 2017.
      https://thenewstack.io/cobol-everywhere-will-maintain/
      You don't think that many lines of cobol will not offer top dollar so ATM's, hospitals, insurance claims systems and what not do not fail. Are you really as stupid as that?

      --
      Anonymous comments are as pathetic as the anonymous "sources" that contaminate gutless journalism from the New York Time
    3. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure I'll go ahead and learn what I need to to keep your stack afloat.
      What's that? You don't want to pay me a reasonable wage? Well then! I guess we have a problem indeed. Scramble on, fine HR folks at "Major Banks and Parts of Federal Gov't"!

      Dude, you are so right. Back in 1992 after graduate school I interviewed with a "credit firm" for a Cobol programmer position. Turns out it was a call center making cold calls to sell poor folks high-interest credit cards and they needed someone to maintain their legacy system. The offer was nice, one of the highest I had, but the feel of the place said stay away. Within a year, the call center was in India.

      Geez, are we really training veterans to compete with Indian, Filipino, and Malaysian programmers. Seriously, that's the best we can do?

    4. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's nonsense anyway, the idea that Cobol is the most prevalent language in financial services still is complete and utter drivel.

      I've worked for a number of financial services organisations, including banks, and I've not come across any still using it. After the whole Y2K drama and the amount they had to spend on contractors they spent the following decade deprecating it, and it's nowhere to be seen in the vast majority of financial services organisations anymore.

      If you really want to know what the "most prevalent programming language in the financial-services industry world-wide" is, then it's Java, followed by C# and C++. R, Python, and SAS are fairly common in analytics work, and other specialist areas like quantitative analysis use the above coupled with a whole bunch of more niche language like F# and Ocaml (e.g. Credit Suisse), or even home grown languages like Slang at Goldman Sachs.

      But Cobol? Yeah no, where did Slashdot find this article? 1999?

    5. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly this.

      COBOL isn't hard. Whatever, it's a language.

      But if you want to take smart people away from their shiny modern languages and dev stacks, and ask them to put up with bureaucracy, then you need to pay them at least commensurate salaries to what they'd get elsewhere (if not MORE).

      These are really stories about banks not wanting to pay talented devs to put up with their BS.

      Mod Parent Up.

      I've been out of college for 15 years now, had lots of work across plenty of platforms, frameworks, and languages.
      I could easily learn COBOL and maintain their systems.
      But, I wouldn't do it for less than $250,000/year and a 5-year contract.

      Why would I ever put my career on a Dead End path without a guarantee of no-longer-has-to-work money?

    6. Re:Seriously? by Tablizer · · Score: 4, Interesting

      COBOL isn't hard. Whatever, it's a language.

      The hard part is reading and following piles of legacy code, some of which may have been written in the "go to" days.

    7. Re:Seriously? by eth1 · · Score: 2

      But if you want to take smart people away from their shiny modern languages and dev stacks, and ask them to put up with bureaucracy, then you need to pay them at least commensurate salaries to what they'd get elsewhere (if not MORE).

      These are really stories about banks not wanting to pay talented devs to put up with their BS.

      No, they're not going to pay well. Why do think they're doing this (from TFS):

      Accenture is coaching hundreds of Cobol programmers every year in India and the Philippines to work at banks.

      Can't wait for all the banking systems to melt down a few years later

    8. Re:Seriously? by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      Been there! I remember one mass of code that I called "spaghetti code with meatballs". For years it was unchanged because nobody but the original guy wanted to work on it. When he left they asked me to rewrite the SOB from scratch. Naturally, there wasn't any documentation.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    9. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, speaking of NOT knowing what the h3ll you're talking about!

    10. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > COBOL isn't hard. Whatever, it's a language.

      All these places teach COBOL. They put out books on COBOL, and punch COBOL through and through to the offshore programmers.

      They don't touch or put one piece of paper out, or even come close to covering JCL for those poor offshore programmers.

      If you ever interview for a COBOL position and they don't ask you a single question about JCL, stand up and walk out the door, because you don't want to walk into that mess at all.

    11. Re: Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      cobol may not be hard, but the IBM mainframe environment/ecosystem those cobol apps run in is not trivial.

    12. Re:Seriously? by thomn8r · · Score: 1
      These are really stories about banks not wanting to pay talented devs to put up with their BS.

      This. Years ago I was a COBOL coder for a major financial company. The anachronistic culture - having to over-dress for office work, micro-managed email and personal phone call quotas - drove me out. Turned out to have been the best unintended career move ever.

    13. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But if you want to take smart people away from their shiny modern languages and dev stacks, and ask them to put up with bureaucracy, then you need to pay them at least commensurate salaries to what they'd get elsewhere (if not MORE).

      Oh, they will pay more. That's the only way you're going to convince anyone to put up with that bureaucratic fucking nightmare.

      And if they refuse to pay, then fuck 'em. They'll learn the hard way just how much good support "costs" when they pay for it in downtime.

    14. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      COBOL isn't hard. Whatever, it's a language.

      COBOL isn't hard; it's just mind-numbingly verbose and also strict. If your transitioning from anything other than Assembly or FORTRAN, you'll probably lose a nut or two trying to keep up ... unless perhaps you've got asperger's, then maybe it's child's play?

    15. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fat Vinnies Pawn Shop is not what people mean when then talk about 'financial service industry', although I guess that must be where your 'experience' was.

    16. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't think that many lines of cobol will not offer top dollar so ATM's, hospitals, insurance claims systems and what not do not fail. Are you really as stupid as that?

      First of all, be smart enough to know who to direct that stupidity to. We wouldn't be having this conversation if it were not in fact true that COBOL programmers are still not commanding the salary they should. The stupidity here is directed to the companies who continue to undervalue their support staff, and that doesn't matter how many trillions of dollars you can tie it to.

      And yeah, I remember the COBOL Y2K hype too. What you fail to remember about that was that "serious money" wasn't coming down until companies were fucking panicking halfway through 1999. We have not yet hit that "panic" phase of COBOL, so massive salaries aren't going to be dropping from the sky anytime soon. And with developing countries trying to pump out COBOL programmers willing to work for pennies compared to US workers we may never see massive salaries.

      In fact, with so many shiny new programming languages to work with, I wouldn't be surprised if COBOL support globally was eventually represented by developing countries. COBOL is one of those long-term support-and-repair languages that we must sustain, not really build and develop new shit. You aren't going to attract the best of the best with that no matter what the salary is. Good programmers don't want to be fucking bored to death.

    17. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you program the customer service website?

    18. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      with our money

    19. Re: Seriously? by datavirtue · · Score: 2

      Just left fin tech. Boring, great place to start but get the fuck out. They are notoriously bad at implementing tech and typically undervalue it.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    20. Re: Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They will meet you half way,
        $25,000 a year contractor, no benefits, & fill out your own 1099.

    21. Re:Seriously? by DarkOx · · Score: 5, Informative

      No even that is not 'hard' tedious often but not hard. People thought it was going to be hard, until they actually tried around y2k and it turned out to be not hard just a lot of work.

      The hard part if there is a hard part is supporting the stack around it. What people, especially people on Slashdot who wrote some Microfocus COBOL in Windows for a college course some time, about COBOL is it does not run in vacuum. Its not the COBOL program that is hard. Its the fact that COPYBOOK is referenced in 65 different programs. Its the 500 JCL job steps before and after with their sync sorts and COND statements. Its the FTP and character conversion steps; and stuff that is scarping CICS and CICS web interfaces around the COBOL you need to worry over.

      All this stuff amounts to Rube Goldburg devices that happened to be constructed from very very reliable and consistently operating components. So it all works and humms along for decades but try and replace any part of it with something new and feel the pain of running a square peg into a round hole.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    22. Re:Seriously? by CaptainDork · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I programmed in COBOL. I liked it.

      It was easy for me to understand.

      What was damned near impossible was straightening out the spaghetti code already in place.

      The way to understand an existing system is to fuck around with it and get inside the programmer's head.

      Once done, I can anticipate what's coming.

      When a system is a hybrid of decades of code by quacks and pros alike, it's a goddam maze.

      Management doesn't take that as an excuse and I excused myself from the management.

      While the wage was competitive, the stress wasn't worth it.

      I'll do startup with COBOL, but there's no market for that.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    23. Re: Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's no education preparing you for this. You need to learn DB2, COBOL, but this is trivial compared to the in-house transactional systems and their terminal interfaces. So it's an investment in employees, which the industry has stopped doing entirely. Fuck them all over to hell!!

    24. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd have these consulting rates:
      Rewrite COBOL to C# -> $60/hour.
      Maintain COBOL - $150/hour.

    25. Re:Seriously? by sjames · · Score: 1

      They may also need to let go of things like expecting people to tie onions to their belt and rags around their neck.

    26. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These are really stories about banks not wanting to pay talented devs to put up with their BS.

      Oh, if they're going to offshore development to India, they'll pay .. and pay and pay and pay, because the quality will be so bad.

      The problem with legacy code, is pieces get reused all over the place. Failure to understand what it does in all of those places before you make any changes usually means you fuck up the whole thing quite spectacularly. Suddenly you break 50 different things at once.

      I've seen numerous examples of companies off-shoring some development work to India, and universally the quality of any resulting code has been terrible. It's late, doesn't compile, is riddled with typos and syntax errors, and is a terrible way to do it. I knew someone who was overseeing a team in India, and spent more time trying to get them to do it right than it would have taken him to do it himself ... obviating most of the cost savings.

      While I've know people who Indian heritage who are good coders and smart at tech, I can't say I've ever seen even a glimmer of intelligence from the offshore guys.

    27. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The alternative is to make them basically competent in the myriad of modern programming languages which means they are competing with just about everyone, foreign and domestic. And honestly as someone hiring a programmer (and not worrying about discipline or work ethic) would you rather someone with a college degree who spend at least 4 years learning and has a solid foundation in computer science/math or a GI who was giving training in a single language alone? I searched a bit and couldn't find anything specific on how long the COBOL Cowboys' courses are and what they include but I would be surprised if they weren't just basic crash courses in COBOL and the immediate environment it inhabits. So, when it comes to almost every other language the answer is obviously the college graduate and the only reason COBOL is any different is because of the relative rarity of programmers. So could we do better? Yeah, but training in modern programming languages probably isn't the answer.

    28. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Naturally, there wasn't any documentation.

      If you're rewriting from scratch then I'd think you'd be more interested in requirements which likely changed over time. It's somewhat surprising that the cost to replace extremely outdated hardware and software is still prohibitive. If the system is so archaic it should either be too archaic for a modern business or it shouldn't be too complicated to replace.

    29. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I dont know what kind of financial serveries companies you worked for, but it they are moving money around between banks it cobol and mainframes.

    30. Re:Seriously? by Pulzar · · Score: 1

      What's that? You don't want to pay me a reasonable wage?

      Considering many of these jobs are in places where programmers don't get paid much, or there's not much of a demand for them, it looks like Cobol programmers do get paid quite a bit more.

      I did a quick search on Glassdoor, in some very non-tech places... Programmers in Jefferson City, MO make $45-65K.. Cobol programmers make $88K. That's probably very good for Jefferson City cost of living.

      --
      Never underestimate the bandwidth of a 747 filled with CD-ROMs.
    31. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All this stuff amounts to Rube Goldburg devices that happened to be constructed from very very reliable and consistently operating components.

      So what you’re saying is COBOL is exactly like .NET/SQL and Java/Oracle except for the reliable and consistently operating part?

    32. Re:Seriously? by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      But if you want to take smart people away from their shiny modern languages and dev stacks, and ask them to put up with bureaucracy, then you need to pay them at least commensurate salaries to what they'd get elsewhere (if not MORE).

      These are really stories about banks not wanting to pay talented devs to put up with their BS.

      Where do they say that they are attempting to underpay these folks?

      I've been doing something similar recently, and the pay is tremendous.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    33. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GOTO isn't so bad, it's just a different mindset. But then my first language was basic, so I would say something like that.

    34. Re:Seriously? by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      No, they're not going to pay well. Why do think they're doing this (from TFS):

      It is the teachers who are getting paid well. If you are ever lucky enough to have accumulated knowledge about something that the noobs aren't doing, there will come a time when you can cash in on it. I know I have. All it takes is knowledge of both old and new.

      4. Profit!

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    35. Re: Seriously? by datavirtue · · Score: 2

      And it continues to hold back the technical progress of the banking and payments industry because people are too chicken shit or incapable of moving away from it. I just spent five years dealing with one fiasco and limitation after another brought on by fucking COBOL and mainframe applications. They completely suck and totally mismatch with the way computer systems have been designed and built since it went out of style. It fell out of favor for a reason, don't glorify it. It hangs around frankly because government regulation is used to stifle innovation in the space where it dominates.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    36. Re: Seriously? by cshark · · Score: 2

      Yeah, but every sufficiently large organization, corporation, and government has things about it that are untenable. For example, I'm working on a scala microservices stack right now, and it's relatively new. But the developers that deployed the original iteration didn't really know the language or the platforms they're working on, so the project six months in is as bad or worse than the worst vb and java apps I've ever seen.

      Fucking verbose case classes EVERYWHERE, and entire sections of architecture that simply don't need to exist. And yet, pretty much everybody's okay with it. It works, right? At least against the mocks?

      I guess my point is that there's no avoiding it. There's no such thing as quality in code in a production environment, and as a professional developer, you just get used to that unfortunate reality.

      Granted, some environments are better than others, and I'm sure that's true about the banking sector as well.

      --

      This signature has Super Cow Powers

    37. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yup. And then let's start talking about different compiler settings for things like bounds checking, what's the default initialisation strategy for areas (where not explicitly set in the code), how memory is or isn't overwritten once freed etc. etc.

      The COBOL part is usually relatively "easy" to port to another platform. But throw in all the architectural stuff that surrounds the COBOL and you're in a whole world of pain. Things that were taken for granted because the current operating system "just does it that way" are the hard parts.

      Disclaimer: I'm currently involved in doing this sort of wok so I know a thing of two about it :)

      capture: sympathy

    38. Re:Seriously? by dwywit · · Score: 1

      I'm curious about COBOL. I was an RPGII/III/400 programmer on AS400s, and IBM was pretty responsive about modernising RPG over that period in the 80s and 90s (and since).

      What's been done to modernise COBOL ?

      --
      They sentenced me to twenty years of boredom
    39. Re:Seriously? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      COBOL programmers are paid a very good wage. Much of that is due to the demand for the skills and the rarity of those with the skills.

    40. Re:Seriously? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      You're demanding that salary only 15 years out of college? Wow, just... wow. That's well above the norm even in Silicon Valley.

    41. Re:Seriously? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Quite a lot like that, except that people who understand it are rarer than those who understand modern Rube Goldberg systems.

    42. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really, I work for an IT government agency. Sometimes I am tasked to review code from outsourced firms. I dont even need to look anymore at Java source code developed by TATA (An Indian Company). But Accenture (An US Company) makes me mad only to see its code.

      An IBM representative one time said to me to not use EJB in their WebSphere Stack (An f***ing EJB Server) cause it was not well supported.

      If you have to outsource people or buy software services from an overseas company, be sure it comes from an Indian company.

    43. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      COBOL is ridiculously *EASY*. I like it because it allows you to just think about the problem instead of the language.

      And really there's no problem-- it's just money and numbers, nothing hard. Easy money :).

    44. Re:Seriously? by Wycliffe · · Score: 2

      You're demanding that salary only 15 years out of college? Wow, just... wow. That's well above the norm even in Silicon Valley.

      That's his point. If you want someone to learn a language that is old-fashion, tedious, has limited growth potential, and is full of bureaucracy then you need to pay above market rates. At most programming jobs you are paid marketing rates and continue to stay up to date with technology and therefore can get a new job when your current job ends. Many programmers are even willing to take below market rate jobs if the work is interesting and has learning potential. Taking a job as a COBOL programmer, you lose all the niceties of modern languages and you also put your career on hold for the duration of the job. They could improve their recruiting a little if they paid people while they learned COBOL but companies don't want to invest in people like that anymore. To improve their odds even more they could pay people while they learned AND give out five year contracts AND find people who only have 5 years till retirement so that people are willing send their careers down a black hole.

      The other option might be to do something similar to what many open source projects do and let people spend 50% of their time pursuing personal projects. This still requires them to basically pay double what the market rate is (as they are only getting 50% of the work) but is probably the most workable solution.

    45. Re:Seriously? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Is it a career dead end if you can spend 20 years doing that work? Ie, I'm doing C right now, it's in high demand, and very interesting, and yet a lot of younger people avoid it for being out of fashion. And yet nearly half the world runs on C and most of the other half runs on COBOL, with a sliver of leftover stuff for everything else.

      In the past, people didn't choose careers for what was interesting and exciting. Sometimes stability and benefits come first. If people only did interesting stuff, we'd never have any accountants who knew how to keep double books for those who do interesting things.

    46. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What kind of money are they offering for COBOL programmers?

    47. Re:Seriously? by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      aking a job as a COBOL programmer, you lose all the niceties of modern languages and you also put your career on hold for the duration of the job.
      In america perhaps! There are plenty of other places where an odd language on your resume gives you huge bonus points!
      Why the funk I would I not hire someone who did the previous 5 years an interesting COBOL project?

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    48. Re:Seriously? by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      I'm doing C right now, it's in high demand, and very interesting, and yet a lot of younger people avoid it for being out of fashion.
      That is double nonsense.
      First it is not in high demand and secondly people don't "avoid it". It is simply not taught in universities and it is a cumbersome language, that is all.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    49. Re: Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice fakeass TCS astroturf. Do the needful and kill yourself.

    50. Re: Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      One mans Spaghetti code is another mans accumulation of mandatory business requirement edge cases fixed under time constraints. Elegant code is for school.

    51. Re:Seriously? by DCFusor · · Score: 1

      The weirder and rarer it is, the better the pay, especially if legacy code is spaghetti. Perl for me, for $. Plenty of people wrote too clever for anyone's good in that one, it makes it easy to show off. Job security for them, and for me. When I write it for myself, you'd not recognize it as perl, it looks sane - freedom can be used either way.

      --
      Why guess when you can know? Measure!
    52. Re: Seriously? by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      Like buzzwords are for boors.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    53. Re:Seriously? by Wycliffe · · Score: 1

      aking a job as a COBOL programmer, you lose all the niceties of modern languages and you also put your career on hold for the duration of the job.
      In america perhaps! There are plenty of other places where an odd language on your resume gives you huge bonus points!
      Why the funk I would I not hire someone who did the previous 5 years an interesting COBOL project?

      On odd language gives you huge bonus points if you also know the language of the job you are applying for. Same goes for an interesting COBOL project (likely not interesting though but rather just maintaining dying code). They problem is that you are now either 5 years behind in the other stacks or you have been doing double time during your off time to maintain your more relevant skills. Either case should command a premium.

    54. Re: Seriously? by astrofurter · · Score: 1

      "Can't wait for all the banking systems to melt down a few years later"

      That actually sounds like a pretty cool side effect!

    55. Re: Seriously? by astrofurter · · Score: 1

      Ever wonder how many back doors were buried down in the spaghetti?

    56. Re: Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nothing.

    57. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yup, yup, yup. you got it.

      also, someone should mod cobol to something like nodejs, make it "cool" to take up on.

    58. Re: Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Turn in your nerd card and go home. People like you are why our industry has such shit pay.

    59. Re: Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Good programmers don't want to be fucking bored to death"

      ALL programming is boring. All programming is a dead end job.

      I couldn't care less about an old language vs the latest shiny. I'd be happy enough with a real (coastal American) middle class salary. Not this mid-100s glass ceiling where the Owners have capped salaries regardless of skill or experience.

    60. Re: Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Zero. This is not unchecked/untested code, it's been done a million times. It's just hard to read/refactor.

    61. Re:Seriously? by aviators99 · · Score: 1

      Pretty much every credit card transaction in the world uses COBOL.

      When I do expert witness work dealing with COBOL I am paid very well.

      Old joke from the '80s: "Have you heard of the new 'object oriented COBOL'? It's called 'Add 1 to COBOL'"

    62. Re: Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People definitely avoid it. It's absolutely used in CS programs, at least the top ones. I wouldn't say they taught it to me. I was expected to learn it on my own after a single lecture. All the other lectures were about the topic on hand - data structures, operating systems, whatever was being covered.

      People avoid C and C++ because it's harder than python and Ruby. The same amount of time time put in yields much less. True, if the program is run a billion times, it's worth the investment, but it makes inexperienced programmers feel less smart because they can't whip out a working Django app in an hour or so. They can barely write a working red-black tree in an evening (or couple of evenings).

    63. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      COBOL isn't hard. It's obscure, arcane, regularly poorly written, often heavily patched and sometime moderately obtuse. The formatting requirements alone would make most younger programmers cry in despair. *Then* it's got fun stuff. My personal favourite is the ALTER statement. In a nutshell, it allows a program to modify the destination subsequent GOTO statement so they end up somewhere else. For example: "ALTER ENDING TO PROCEED TO BEGINNING" changes any subsequent "GOTO ENDING" into a "GOTO BEGINNING". You lose control of how a program flows. Awesome. This amazing feature should be in every language.

    64. Re:Seriously? by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      They problem is that you are now either 5 years behind in the other stacks
      And who cares about that?

      to maintain your more relevant skills.
      There is nothing to maintain. Skills don't just rot away.

      I mostly do Java related stuff ... most companies are using Java 7, some Java 6, some 8 ... never met one that is actually using the most recent version, or the second recent version.

      There never will be a job interview where the most recent Java or C++ version is of any relevance. Actually most of the time, the programming language is not of any relevance anyway.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    65. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The COBOL part is usually relatively "easy" to port to another platform. But throw in all the architectural stuff that surrounds the COBOL and you're in a whole world of pain.

      Yep, the number of times I've heard "This system is going off the mainframe next year. End of." then 5-10 years later, mainframe system still running...

    66. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On z/OS, the big leap was OS/VS COBOL to COBOL II, which gave COBOL all the standard structures for a procedural language (e.g. in-line PERFORM, END-IF type delimiters) which were missing in OS/VS. Entreprise COBOL (the current flavour) has added a lots of extra features and library routines over the years but I get the impression they're not widely used.

    67. Re: Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ideally you might pay someone five days' wages for three days' scheduled work, allowing two days for other projects as the premium. But six days work for five days' pay sounds better to bean counters.

    68. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's nothing inherently wrong with GOTO, it is just it tends to get used improperly. Same thing is said about C macros and C++ template meta-programming. GOTO is often a cleaner approach than multiple nested if/else conditionals. Right tool for the job.

    69. Re: Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is well known that code outsourced from india is garbage. You get what you pay for.

    70. Re: Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But, muh startup and stock options and games at work and stuff!

      You know, projects need to be done with what's fashionable and within the limited skillset of millennials and H1-Bs and stuff. Otherwise you're just old fashioned and we're going to call you names and make remarks about old people having no marketable skills even though the opposite is true because nothing is offensive when we say it! That's our reality. Actual reality can bite me.

      Never mind of course that this attitude is bought, paid for, and marketed by a compliant tech media that is doing all it can to drive down wages and drive people out of IT for the sake of bringing new, cheaper workers in because all the MBAs just know all developers are interchangeable.

      Seriously though: (not a COBOL person and never been a mainframer btw) when I got into this I would seek out people who'd made careers out of it because, you know, they knew stuff. That was useful and it helped me. Now it seems everyone is running around re-inventing stuff they have no idea even existed in the first place because nothing that came before them matters. All for a pat on the head and getting praise on social media for the most trivial of accomplishments.

    71. Re: Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This. The only reason I don't read code that comes from Indian companies is it's such a gadawful unfixable mess it makes my brain hurt.

      A friend of mine loves them though. An ignorant exec in his org keeps 'saving money' using them, and then he makes a living cleaning up the resulting catastrophes. So I guess they do have their uses.

    72. Re: Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is what makes it easy to bury on a backdoor.

    73. Re:Seriously? by houghi · · Score: 1

      Friend of mine studied IT and had COBOL because of the Y2K 'issue' so that getting a job would be almost guearanteed.
      The minor issue was that he would have finished mid 2001, so the world would have been burnt by then.

      He dropped out and did (what was then possible) the job search without a degree. Just saying "I know Internet" was enough in that time to get a job. Many people where "promoted" to IT manager after they put up their hand when people asked in a random meeting"Who owns a computer?".
      Their first meeting in the new function with the CEO was: "We heard a lot about this Intertube thing and you must do this fore us. You have no budget and 3 weeks." Ah, the good old times when knowing 'telnet' and 'ping' was enough to be called a guru.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    74. Re: Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      COBOL is probably the very best language ever for writing business processes, especially accounting type stuff. Yeah, it's verbose but it's also practically self documenting and it compiles efficient as all getout. It's the reason we had things like global credit card and banking systems using hardware that a millenial would think useless to do anything with because their bloatware won't run on it.

      The only reason it's not used for that more is people think it's uncool, and the aforementioned bloatware problem.

      Now, it's bad at UI stuff--so don't use it for that. That way all these overpaid underskilled 'web designers' will still have something to do.

    75. Re: Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or maybe you lacked the skills to figure it out and your own stuff sucked as a result?

    76. Re: Seriously? by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      When I worked COBOL there was no Internet.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    77. Re: Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      $100k a year is shit?

    78. Re:Seriously? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      It is that hard, at least for many modern programmers. COBOL 2002 made it a bit easier, but a lot of existing code goes way back before then and upgrading it is a major task in itself.

      I dare say most people could be taught to do COBOL, but companies prefer to let someone else do the investment and then just tempt those staff away with a slightly better offer.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    79. Re: Seriously? by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      "Most of the other half" does *not* run on COBOL or this debate simply wouldn't be taking place.

    80. Re:Seriously? by Wycliffe · · Score: 2

      There is nothing to maintain. Skills don't just rot away.

      Yes they do. Ask any foreign language speaker. They have to constantly maintain their language or they start to forget it. I used to be an excellent at C++. I haven't used it in 10 years and my skills are definitely a lot more rusty. I've forgotten many of the shortcuts for debugging, etc... I've also forgotten most of the calculus and physics I've learned in college as well as no longer have the periodical table memorized. I once read that you need to read X (don't remember the number) books per year just to not go backwards. This is the reason that most professional certifications require continuous education in order to maintain your certificate and license.

    81. Re:Seriously? by DarthVain · · Score: 1

      Having taken a COBOL in university (years ago), I'd go farther to say not only is COBOL not hard, it is probably easier that most. It is a very literal language if you can call it that.

      The only thing that makes it "hard", is that outside of perhaps some specialized uses (i.e. banking for example), it isn't used anywhere. So aside from learning the basics in university, there isn't a lot of places to really cut your teeth on it, thus likely most COBOL coders are of the graybeard variety. Additionally the only other thing being that almost all of the code associated with it will be Legacy (with a fscking capitol "L"), meaning that much of it will be an incomprehensible undocumented and uncommented mess to be untangled. Which isn't to say that is unique to COBOL, only that much of it would fall into that category unlike some of the more modern languages and maybe more importantly more modern techniques used to write them (i.e. proper documentation). Maybe... :) I work with a lot of legacy systems, none of which are COBOL, but all of them probably have similar if not as extensive issues.

    82. Re: Seriously? by LordWabbit2 · · Score: 1

      because people are too chicken shit or incapable of moving away from it

      Wrong! COBOL is still around because there are millions of lines of it running, to rewrite that into xyz language would take YEARS and cost BILLIONS. I don't think you realize exactly how much code is running the worlds financial institutions, and how thoroughly it gets tested before going live. Don't even get me started on the cost of replacing a mainframe with a server room full of servers, but then modern mainframes can actually run Linux VM's, so technically they could still carry on using their mainframes. One other reason it's still so much in use is that an IBM mainframe is fucking stable, you don't need to reboot for AGES,. What bank in their right mind would fork up money (and a LOT of it) to replace something that works 100% and is rock solid stable for something that keeps falling over and needs a restart?

      It fell out of favor for a reason, don't glorify it.

      It fell out of favor because it's boring fucking work, I started out in COBOL after 4 years I was bored out of my mind and moved to front end development.

      It hangs around frankly because government regulation is used to stifle innovation in the space where it dominates.

      I don't know where you live, but my government is not mandating that ANY financial institution HAS to use COBOL, yes there are regulations etc. but that is more to do with how you store sensitive data, how long you have to store it etc. etc.

      One thing I miss about COBOL was how it handles splitting up strings. Works like a charm, and was probably your biggest problem when trying to communicate with a COBOL program on a mainframe. It's literally built into the language, to split up a string all you have to do is define it segments in your working storage, drop the string into the 01 level and it automagically slices and dices the string into it's component parts and will even cast the string into the relevant data format (numbers etc.) No other code is required, and yes, one of the front end programs I worked on had to talk to a COBOL program (several actually) on a mainframe.

      --
      There are three kinds of falsehood: the first is a 'fib,' the second is a downright lie, and the third is statistics.
    83. Re:Seriously? by DarthVain · · Score: 1

      Regardless of language, ANY legacy system that is decades old, that likely has little or no documentation, which has had development upon development piled upon in by a variety of developers, some good, some not so much makes it "difficult" no mater what language you are working in. It just happens that with COBOL, being so old, is what you mostly find. The language itself is pretty literal.

      I've worked with legacy systems for years. I've found some pretty "interesting" things in my time (in most cases a OMFG why the heck did they do it this way), which upon deep inspection usually end up being what was thought at the time as an expedient or elegant hack to solve some unique problem of the day. I am literally trying to reverse engineer a DB data model which are just full or what I perceive as development shortcuts which were done primarily because it was just easier to do at the time rather than them making any sort of comprehensive sense. The person that did them is 20 years gone, so you can only guess as to the motivation in many cases. Though often time when you look hard enough you can see the business rule that changed, and the kludge was done to address it. Some are even a bit inspired, however it takes a lot of sorting out before you get it.

    84. Re:Seriously? by LordWabbit2 · · Score: 1

      Erm, yeah are SO wrong there it's not funny. Just because you worked for a bank on their software systems that didn't interface directly with COBOL does not mean it does not exist, it just means you probably worked on a lot of their web pages. I would also bet money on the fact that somewhere in that suite of libraries you had to call to get data etc. there is a call to a COBOL mainframe, it was just wrapped up in a class you were handed to do the communication for you. Just because you didn't have to work with it directly does not mean it no longer exists, or is not still in use.

      I've worked for (or with) 4 of our major banks and the settlement and clearing house in our country, they ALL use COBOL in the backend. Nice GUI front end (or web) but in the back doing the heavy lifting - is COBOL.

      --
      There are three kinds of falsehood: the first is a 'fib,' the second is a downright lie, and the third is statistics.
    85. Re: Seriously? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Well, "half the world" doesn't say in what units or the like. But in terms of number of computers running COBOL it is very small. In terms of the number of transactions processed by COBOL it's massive. It keeps the world spinning. If Google searched vanished tomorrow the world would go on, but if all the COBOL systems vanished then it's likely we'd have a massive economic depression and multiple industries would collapse. This is foundational stuff that so much of modern life is built on top of.

    86. Re: Seriously? by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Cobol is more or less married to CICS. DB2 would be great, but no, your going to be using a database engine/middleware server from 1968.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    87. Re:Seriously? by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      May a Fortran program with calculated goto* land in your support bucket.

      That's Goto intvar, where intvar contains a line number.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    88. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I started out being a cobol programmer in the early 70s. It is really easy, not too many instructions to learn at all. I hated it and started writing in IBM assembler. I self trained myself and was moved up from operations by my company. You could train someone to program in cobol in less in a week.

      I used to use only goto's and loved them. The programs were straight in line coding and easy to follow. What I hated is those coders who were trained in college to branch and branch and branch back and forth, back and forth, to a multitude of separate routines. You had to flip and flip back and forth the listing. Some times you wouldn't have enough fingers to hold your place.

    89. Re:Seriously? by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      That's just self modifying code.

      If you've never written self modifying code, turn in your nerd card.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    90. Re: Seriously? by zwarte+piet · · Score: 1

      If it worked then, it works now! Now Get of my Lawn!

    91. Re:Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Okay, I've looked at your resume, and I like what I've seen well enough to interview you. Now, what we here at WeBuildHouses(TM) really need is someone who knows hammers. Can you tell me about your prior hammer experience?

    92. Re:Seriously? by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Your programming skills don't rot away.
      It has nothing to do with doing calculus or physics anymore since graduation.

      It is just a language. Half an hour working with it bring you right back to where you dropped it 10 years ago.

      This is the reason that most professional certifications require continuous education in order to maintain your certificate and license.
      Because they usually require physical skills and a "protocol". As in surgery or piloting.

      well as no longer have the periodical table memorized.
      And for what, except passing a stupid constructed test, would you need to memorize that?
      The basics you can reconstruct from your mind, and if an obscure element like Tellurium or Circonium is in that column or the other one hardly matters for the jobs or hobbies you are working in.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    93. Re:Seriously? by SCVonSteroids · · Score: 1

      It is just a language. Half an hour working with it bring you right back to where you dropped it 10 years ago.

      HTML doesn't count.

      --
      I tend to rant.
    94. Re:Seriously? by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      The last paragraph appears to contradict itself. It seems you only loved your go-to's, not others'.

    95. Re: Seriously? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can use a Cobol programming Generator as I am doing. It converts parameters into cobol coding. It generales a working program in minutes. You can add all your routines to perform them easily. sixmorgo@gmail.com.

  3. South Africa, India and Bangladesh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    Gee whiz sounds like there is lots of meaningful COBOL work to be done by the worlds best and brightest.

    1. Re: South Africa, India and Bangladesh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. The best and the brightest are not on /. anymore.

      This is a site for SJW, retards, jerks, ....

      Damn, I repeat myself.

    2. Re: South Africa, India and Bangladesh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True

  4. I skipped COBOL class deliberately by presidenteloco · · Score: 2

    So as to never be roped into a job like that.

    In my defense, back then, COBOL did not even have an ELSE statement.

    It was just pretty dumb.
    And all the stuff written in it was stultifyingly boring.

    That was the best 1% mark I ever sacrificed.

    --

    Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
    1. Re:I skipped COBOL class deliberately by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, who wants steady employment anyway! Stick with Obj-C and Rust and Lisp and the flavor of the month instead...

    2. Re:I skipped COBOL class deliberately by Archtech · · Score: 1

      It was just pretty dumb.
      And all the stuff written in it was stultifyingly boring.

      Yes, all about money and stuff like that. Paralyzingly boring. Who cares about lousy old money?

      --
      I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
    3. Re:I skipped COBOL class deliberately by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well sort of. The question is is it becoming sufficiently hard and contractors sufficiently expensive that they're rewriting in a modern language? Likely your job is only secure until the team next door (or whoever they outsourced to) finish the rewrite and pass testing.

    4. Re:I skipped COBOL class deliberately by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      > Yeah, who wants steady employment anyway! Stick with Obj-C and Rust and Lisp and the flavor of the month instead...

      Never had a problem really.

      As an added bonus of sound planning and not being located in Silicon Valley, I can work as much or as little as I like. I can take early retirement any time I want.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    5. Re: I skipped COBOL class deliberately by datavirtue · · Score: 1

      How about C#, Java, and Python instead. COBOL is a world of suck. It is like assembly language for batch jobs.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    6. Re:I skipped COBOL class deliberately by Greyfox · · Score: 1

      I was forced to take THREE in college, for some reason, and have never it since then. When Y2K reared its ugly head, I set my asking price for COBOL programming to $300 an hour. Never had any takers. Nowadays I reckon I'd be pretty rusty at it but if someone wants to pay me $3000 a day plus expenses, I suppose I could dust off an old textbook.

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    7. Re: I skipped COBOL class deliberately by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Uhhhh ... the batch jobs you write in JCL ...

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    8. Re:I skipped COBOL class deliberately by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 2

      It was just pretty dumb. And all the stuff written in it was stultifyingly boring.

      Yes, all about money and stuff like that. Paralyzingly boring. Who cares about lousy old money?

      Quiet! all these young guys need to think that there's no money in supporting legacy systems.

      Stay away! You'll be paid less than minimum wage! COBOL is dead anyhow - this is just fake News!

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    9. Re:I skipped COBOL class deliberately by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've heard of people who skipped school entirely; they're not getting roped into a job either.

      Lack of knowledge is not something you should be proud of.

  5. Repost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This same thing has been said every five years since the 90s. You think they would have done something by now after they realized what a mess things were prior to Y2K.

    1. Re:Repost by Archtech · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I remember in about 1991 people were talking about how Cobol was "dead" and it would soon go away. I checked and found that over 100 billion lines of Cobol code were used in vital business systems every day.

      In about 1995 there was another wave of "Cobol is dead". I checked the same sources and now it was over 200 billion lines.

      Reality is that which doesn't change just because we don't like it.

      --
      I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
    2. Re:Repost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cobol is what makes the financial industry ripe for disruption. Billions of lines of code will be replaced by a couple of startups and whatever their language of choice will be. Cobol is the embodiment of bureaucracy and inefficiency. None of those systems were ever meant to do real-time transactions. If you're wondering why banks are so old-fashioned, this is why. Their systems can only do it the old way. Things that look like they should be easy are incredibly hard when you have to map them to an old batch processing system that nobody can touch without breaking something because all the people who understood the system have long retired. Cobol will go away. The question is whether the banks will survive or if it takes the same kind of revolution that has wrecked department stores.

    3. Re:Repost by alvinrod · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't be surprised if about 8,000 years from now, there's a massive Y10K crisis because some ancient Cobol programmers only used 4 digits for their date fields.

    4. Re:Repost by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Short term thinking is part of it, as in the bottom line for the next 4 quarters is of vital importance to keeping your stock price inflated. The other big snag is that there's a much bigger tendency in modern time for huge projects to have exorbitant cost overruns.

  6. Maybe not a good career move in the U.S. by ItsJustAPseudonym · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Accenture is coaching hundreds of Cobol programmers every year in India and the Philippines to work at banks.

    So, if you are in the U.S. and you know Cobol already, you might get a few years of employment out of it. However, such jobs will go overseas, too.

    1. Re:Maybe not a good career move in the U.S. by Ichijo · · Score: 1

      Excellent! More bugs to fix, bugs created by programmers who didn't know what they were doing and were never expected to maintain the codebase in the future and so they made a big unreadable mess that just barely works, usually.

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    2. Re:Maybe not a good career move in the U.S. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But people are literally saying they would never work for a system like that due to the problems you just described...

    3. Re:Maybe not a good career move in the U.S. by oh-dark-thirty · · Score: 2

      I'm around 10 years from retiirement and would happily ride that wave into the sunset. My very first real job was coding COBOL on a Wang VS80 (later we upgraded to the VS100, woo), I'm sure it would all come back to me.

    4. Re:Maybe not a good career move in the U.S. by oh-dark-thirty · · Score: 1

      It's not impossible to make spaghetti with the language, but it's also not that hard to read and follow the logic to make block diagrams, flowcharts, etc from old code.. This is just a guess but I'd bet there are tools out there to do just that.

    5. Re:Maybe not a good career move in the U.S. by PPH · · Score: 1

      'In the U.S.'

      So what are other countries using? Because a few more years of 'do what we say or else' and banking, being the reserve currency and the seat of the world's energy markets will just go overseas. Find out what they use and learn that.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    6. Re:Maybe not a good career move in the U.S. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On a slightly related note, I'm at a company with a lot of C programmers as we sell embedded systems, routing equipment, stuff like that. So while recruiting to find candidates for an open req, the head of the recruiters for this company with 5000+ employees sent an email back explaining why it's hard to find good resumes, saying "Of course C is a very old language, and not many people wish to use it anymore".

      Which baffles the mind, did we manage to staff up a thousand or more C programmers and now suddenly the recruiters hit a wall?

    7. Re:Maybe not a good career move in the U.S. by vtcodger · · Score: 1

      Some COBOL work will surely be offshored, but for bank systems -- unlike web crap and similar stuff -- the software deals directly with money. Erroneous outputs are perhaps likely to be more easily seen than in other fields. I'm not sure that some COBOL programming won't hang around in the US to take advantage of easier communications and less management aggravation. OTOH, programming for banks may not be a terribly high paying job. Banks are somewhat notorious for giving the low level staff the mushroom treatment.

      --
      You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
    8. Re:Maybe not a good career move in the U.S. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      In Europe the banks are actually the highest payers, and insurances.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    9. Re:Maybe not a good career move in the U.S. by byteherder · · Score: 1

      Accenture is coaching hundreds of Cobol programmers every year in India and the Philippines to work at banks.

      So, if you are in the U.S. and you know Cobol already, you might get a few years of employment out of it. However, such jobs will go overseas, too.

      You will have a job for a few years and then they will outsource your position. A few years later you can come back as a consultant to fix the spaghetti code that the overseas 'coders' ran through a blender.

      I see it happen all the time.

  7. What about PDP-8 assembly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder if that is worth anything. probably not, but I do have a fair amount of IBM 360 assembly and fortran-II. Yes, I'm an old fat guy ;-)

    1. Re:What about PDP-8 assembly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My shop is a mixture of COBOL and 390/z assembler so you'd probably do pretty well here!

    2. Re:What about PDP-8 assembly by ArchieBunker · · Score: 1
      --
      Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    3. Re:What about PDP-8 assembly by bobbied · · Score: 1

      DEC went belly up a couple of decades ago... PDP-8 went out of favor for the PDP-11, then the VAX-11 did that in with the thumb switches on the thing.

      I'm with you though, I wonder if my DEC VAX Administrator training certificates are worth anything more than for starting a bonfire, or my demonstrated ability to adjust the boot loader for the Harris H100 to use the correct CDC 300 Megabyte 8 platter Drive to boot Vulcan is a marketable skill. Somehow, I'm guessing not.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    4. Re:What about PDP-8 assembly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bet they're worth about as much as my NetWare 4 CNE certification is...

    5. Re:What about PDP-8 assembly by sjames · · Score: 1

      Yet the PDP-11 lives on. In the '90's and early 2000s in the form of the Osprey, a PDP-11 on a PCI card. Now, software emulators are fast enough.

    6. Re:What about PDP-8 assembly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shiiiiit. My base was still using a REAL PDP-11 until 3 years ago. Now we're phasing out our AS400s but bringing 1990s Sun Sparcs back online. Our government runs on so much old junk...including the leadership.

  8. You can learn Cobol well enough to get a job by rsilvergun · · Score: 2

    in about 90 days. Buddy of mine did it back in the day. But without a college degree you won't make it through modern HR filters. Why hire a high school grad for $80k + 40/hr/week when you can import a dev for $60k + 72/hr/week?

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  9. Most prevalent? No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    "Cobol is still the most prevalent programming language in the financial-services industry world-wide". Not a chance. Don't pretend every bank has decades old mainframes and that there's no way or incentive to replace the hardware or software.

    It's one of these stupid anecdotes that was true back in the 90's.

    1. Re:Most prevalent? No. by Archtech · · Score: 1

      Don't pretend every bank has decades old mainframes.

      No - just the ones whose systems work reliably and consistently, and don't have regular catastrophic "IT outages".

      Ever heard the definition of a "legacy system"? One that works.

      --
      I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
    2. Re:Most prevalent? No. by shadowknot · · Score: 5, Informative

      It really isn't a stupid anecdote. Go to SHARE or GSE in Europe, you'll see representatives from the largest financial, retail and governmental industries who represent the bulk of transactional computing in the world. Practically every debit/credit/charge card swipe goes through a COBOL program, and these aren't "legacy" systems that are simply being maintained but systems in active development. I know personally of programs that have been written to facilitate new features like various NFC payment technologies recently. I will grant you that it's a largely invisible sector of the IT industry, if I wasn't in it I would probably still be ignorant to it too.

    3. Re:Most prevalent? No. by bws111 · · Score: 1

      Where does this STUPID idea that mainframes are 'decades old' come from? Of course these companies replace hardware. They spend MILLIONS of dollars doing it, and they do it every few years. And what do they replace it with? NEW mainframes, because they are best suited for the job. The latest IBM Z mainframe was released 4 whole months ago.

    4. Re:Most prevalent? No. by Penguinisto · · Score: 1

      Don't pretend every bank has decades old mainframes...

      You're right - many of them have fairly new mainframes. Running the same software.

      (hint: guess what most web banking firms have to keep writing connectors for, even today?)

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    5. Re:Most prevalent? No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Noobish 'programmers' would suggest replacing the mainframe with a cloud server running their Node application.

      I get this all the time. "Why Don't we upgrade that old system with a new Windows server and upgrade the application?"

      My answer is always "That 'old system' makes this bank 900K per day. Don't touch it!"

    6. Re:Most prevalent? No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't pretend every bank has decades old mainframes.

      No - just the ones whose systems work reliably and consistently, and don't have regular catastrophic "IT outages".

      So, no actual banks then?

    7. Re:Most prevalent? No. by shadowknot · · Score: 1

      Mainframe (z/OS or zTPF) centric applications like CICS and WAS have native SOAP/REST interfaces now, so while it may be true that interfaces are being written because they need to understand how to actually address the data that is stored in these systems, developers are able to do so with modern APIs for the most part. Now as for the backends themselves, i.e. the programs that facilitate the business logic, that's what the COBOL and in some cases Assembler programmers are needed for!

    8. Re:Most prevalent? No. by tazan · · Score: 1

      I don't know about the best suited reason. When I worked in a mainframe shop they bought new ones because they were locked in because of their 4 decades of software. They actually wanted out pretty bad.

    9. Re: Most prevalent? No. by datavirtue · · Score: 1

      They are locked in for various reasons. They want out but getting out sets off the risk meter and they just bow thier head and buy another. Don't act like these people are jazzed about maintaining this expensive, inflexible shit.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    10. Re:Most prevalent? No. by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Not just banks though. It's common in payroll processing and stuff like that as well.

    11. Re:Most prevalent? No. by LordWabbit2 · · Score: 1

      Insurance companies too, I know of at least of logistics system running a large retailers order and payment system that is written in COBOL - I know this because my sister works there (yes she is a COBOL programmer). They have just finished a big update to the system so that it handles the automatic loading of trucks as well. Each distribution center has it's own mainframe, and when they open up more, they buy a mainframe for it. So COBOL is definitely not dead, neither are mainframes, it's just a LOT quieter than other IT industries, probably because of the stigma attached to the language, they don't want to admit working with it around non COBOL developers.

      --
      There are three kinds of falsehood: the first is a 'fib,' the second is a downright lie, and the third is statistics.
  10. It's the context of the job that matters by macraig · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Simply knowing COBOL isn't the deciding factor. Could I stomach being employed in the banking industry and facilitating the awful shit they pull? No. So whether I know COBOL or not is irrelevant.

    1. Re:It's the context of the job that matters by Tablizer · · Score: 2

      Could I stomach being employed in the banking industry and facilitating the awful [bleep] they pull?

      I've worked at/for a lot co's, and jerkativity is NOT limited to just banking.

    2. Re:It's the context of the job that matters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I could stomach a boring job in finance for the right price.

    3. Re:It's the context of the job that matters by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Simply knowing COBOL isn't the deciding factor. Could I stomach being employed in the banking industry and facilitating the awful shit they pull? No. So whether I know COBOL or not is irrelevant.

      I'm curious.. What stuff do they pull that you don't like?

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    4. Re:It's the context of the job that matters by macraig · · Score: 0

      Can you please specify where I stated that it was? What I did say is that the context of the job matters, and that context can be substantially the same regardless of the industry or name on the door.

      Truth be told, almost every corporation with external shareholders sucks. It's impossible to maintain any sort of ethics in an environment where the company owes its existence to people who care nothing for it past its profitability to them.

    5. Re:It's the context of the job that matters by macraig · · Score: 0

      If you are actually seeking knowledge and not just trolling to start a confrontation from the expected answer, I am not the person to educate you about the banking industry. That history is well documented. Go read, since you've managed to grow to adulthood without paying attention.

    6. Re:It's the context of the job that matters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Could I stomach being employed in the banking industry and facilitating the awful [bleep] they pull?

      I've worked at/for a lot co's, and jerkativity is NOT limited to just banking.

      True, but banking is limited to jerkativity. I have never seen a bank IT department that wasn't simply awful. I refuse to work at one again.

      They don't even pay very well considering the piles money they have to throw away at dead-end projects.

    7. Re:It's the context of the job that matters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps you mean providing the capital liquidity that made the modern world possible?

    8. Re:It's the context of the job that matters by westlake · · Score: 1

      Simply knowing COBOL isn't the deciding factor. Could I stomach being employed in the banking industry and facilitating the awful shit they pull?

      Now you know why out-sourcing to countries with workers more interested in gainful employment than nursing old grievances makes good sense.

    9. Re:It's the context of the job that matters by bobbied · · Score: 1

      If you are actually seeking knowledge and not just trolling to start a confrontation from the expected answer, I am not the person to educate you about the banking industry. That history is well documented. Go read, since you've managed to grow to adulthood without paying attention.

      Actually, instead of assuming something, I was asking to be sure what issues where being alluded to. I may not interpret history the same way as you, so it was an effort to stay focused and relevant in the discussion.

      My perspective on the banking industry is similar to my perspective on oil refineries. They have their bad points and can be messy, but we'd be in bad shape as a society without them.

      However, reading between the lines of your two posts, I'm guessing you are just wanting to bash the banking system, and not really discuss the specifics of why you want to do that. I further figure you really don't have any specifics about your issues, at least ones you can defend. So I'll leave you to bash that which you don't understand in peace.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    10. Re:It's the context of the job that matters by macraig · · Score: 1

      Now you know why out-sourcing to countries with workers so desperate to merely survive that they'll tolerate any degree of disadvantagement makes good sense.

      FTFY.

      Outsourcing bites those greedy employers in the ass soon enough: when the local standard of living rises just enough that thriving and not surviving is now the focus, those disadvantaged people will begin to rebel and demand fair treatment. Then the greedy employers pull up the anchor and sail for the next region full of desperate people... until there are none left. First it was Mexico, then India, then Moldova. It won't go on forever. That's even assuming that awareness of global ethics doesn't put a stop to such abuse entirely.

    11. Re:It's the context of the job that matters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Simply knowing COBOL isn't the deciding factor. Could I stomach being employed in the banking industry and facilitating the awful shit they pull?

      Now you know why out-sourcing to countries with workers more interested in gainful employment than nursing old grievances makes good sense.

      Outsourcing to Indian developers is a great way to never actually get anything accomplished. Try it yourself.

    12. Re:It's the context of the job that matters by djinn6 · · Score: 1

      Do you honestly think anyone smart enough to learn to code wouldn't also be smart enough to see it's a language with no future? Indian or not, they'll be gone as soon as they find something better.

    13. Re:It's the context of the job that matters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Me too. I'm very well educated, but I'd like to know what specific aspect of banking that you are referring to in "facilitating the awful shit they pull".
      We both know you have no idea what you're talking about, but why not give it a shot?

    14. Re:It's the context of the job that matters by LordWabbit2 · · Score: 1

      I could stomach a boring job in finance for the right price.

      Perhaps, but when you slit your wrists at the thought of going to work on a Monday morning, the right price will mean little.

      --
      There are three kinds of falsehood: the first is a 'fib,' the second is a downright lie, and the third is statistics.
  11. Do You Know Cobol? If So, There Might Be a Job for by bob4u2c · · Score: 2

    do you know cobol? IF so, there MIGHT be a job for you.

    Yeah, sure let me get right on that. If, might; why not waste my time on vague promises?

  12. Would you even be looking for a job? by OrangeTide · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The way COBOL programs are structured I think you had to have been programming in the 1970's to really understand the idioms and work flow. That means you may have been on the job for 40+ years already, putting you pretty close to retirement age if you were one of the younger folks to pick up COBOL in the late 1970's.

    We're going to hit a brick wall in about 5 years on this, and some businesses will have to learn an expensive lesson about the sunk cost fallacy.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    1. Re: Would you even be looking for a job? by cyber-vandal · · Score: 2

      Don't worry. India will do the needful.

    2. Re: Would you even be looking for a job? by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      Indian jobs are getting outsourced to Poland, Romania, Brazil, China, Philippines, and Michigan.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    3. Re:Would you even be looking for a job? by deKernel · · Score: 1

      And how much would you like to bet on that 5 year prediction? Before you decide, let me give you a little history lesson. I have been in the financial sector since the very early 90's, and every 5 years or so, all of the really smart people claim just what you are claiming, and guess what happens.....

    4. Re:Would you even be looking for a job? by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      One of these 5 year periods I'll get it right.

      But more seriously if you look at the ages, say some was 20 when they started programming COBOL in 1978. They'd be 60 now. In 5 years They'd be 65. Maybe they'd retire and spend time with your grandkids, maybe you'd work until they're 70 or even 75. What I don't find reasonable is the sustainability of an industry based on a population of 80 year old programmers.

      Now here's where my argument falls apart. It assumes people aren't learning COBOL. If you look at data from university computer science programs, you'd believe that not enough college graduates are bothering to learn it to sustain the industry. What is harder to factor in is that a lot of the old timers were self-taught computer operators and techs that transitioned to programming. There may be some significant number of people outside of the computer science industry. I don't have that data, but I would not estimate it to be a huge number.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    5. Re:Would you even be looking for a job? by OrangeTide · · Score: 2

      Maybe they'd retire and spend time with your grandkids

      oops, that turned unexpectedly creepy. substitute the appropriate pronounce.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    6. Re:Would you even be looking for a job? by jythie · · Score: 1

      but.. I thought blockchain was going to replace it all? Can you implement blockchain in COBOL?

    7. Re: Would you even be looking for a job? by thomn8r · · Score: 4, Funny
      and Michigan

      For the love of god and all that is holy - is there any 3rd-world country they *won't* exploit?

    8. Re:Would you even be looking for a job? by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      Can you implement blockchain in COBOL?

      Here's where you can ask: https://www.ibm.com/it-infrast...

      Go ahead and ask . . . and then tell us how it went . . .

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    9. Re:Would you even be looking for a job? by deKernel · · Score: 1

      I'm not just how familiar you are with the core banking packages that banks use, but they are quite complex and consists of my components. The only parts that are typically still in COBOL is the part that holds balances and transactions on the accounts which typically require very little maintenance...if any at all. It is because of this stability plus the fact that IBM does do a good job of maintaining compatibility that COBOL code like this will continue to be in production systems at banks for long after people like you and me are retired.

    10. Re:Would you even be looking for a job? by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      Yup. relying on the continued support from a single vendor is always a good plan.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    11. Re: Would you even be looking for a job? by datavirtue · · Score: 1

      Rolling on the floor kicking and crying with laughter...holy shit

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    12. Re: Would you even be looking for a job? by datavirtue · · Score: 1

      It doesn't exist but they will hurry up and promise it to you for a fee.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    13. Re:Would you even be looking for a job? by dwywit · · Score: 1

      How many vendors of Z-series or compatible mainframes are there? How many have been and gone? Who's still around, charging up the wazoo for maintenance and strangely enough, providing that support?

      If it was easier and cheaper to move to a bunker of intel servers, don't you think they'd have done it by now?

      --
      They sentenced me to twenty years of boredom
    14. Re:Would you even be looking for a job? by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      Agreed. IBM will be around forever. There never has been a highly profitable business that failed due to mismanagement.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    15. Re: Would you even be looking for a job? by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

      European devs can do way better than a job trying to decipher a 40 year old mess of COBOL. There's a big shortage of 21st century skills too.

    16. Re:Would you even be looking for a job? by dwywit · · Score: 1

      Yes, they're very slow to respond to changing business and economic circumstances, leading to questionable business decisions such as licencing instead of buying DOS from Bill Gates.

      What they do really well is: R&D, and build reliable minicomputers and mainframes. They've also relatively recently started responding better to the real world, e.g. adopting, promoting, and supporting Linux as a platform. I'd like to see the POWER9 systems placed on an economically competitive scale with Intel servers, but that's not their thing.

      My point stands - there are no other vendors to choose from.

      --
      They sentenced me to twenty years of boredom
    17. Re:Would you even be looking for a job? by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      I believe strongly that a company is only as good as its executive management. Once positions have been swapped out a few times, a company's culture and business strategy changes pretty dramatically. Tying your business's fate to another when you have no crystal ball is a real gamble in my opinion. It's fine to use a vendor like IBM, they provide an excellent product in this case (I'm slightly familiar with z/System, z/OS and z/Linux). But a backup plan so that one failed company doesn't take several others with it seems prudent to me.

      My point stands - there are no other vendors to choose from.

      In house development exists, but it's terribly inefficient. I worked at a few that do that. And even dabbled a bit with some third party compilers on z. Maybe it won't matter, and IBM will last another 100 years. I really don't have any way of knowing.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    18. Re: Would you even be looking for a job? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, yes there is. Alabama.

    19. Re:Would you even be looking for a job? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The way COBOL programs are structured I think you had to have been programming in the 1970's to really understand the idioms and work flow. That means you may have been on the job for 40+ years already, putting you pretty close to retirement age if you were one of the younger folks to pick up COBOL in the late 1970's.

      We're going to hit a brick wall in about 5 years on this, and some businesses will have to learn an expensive lesson about the sunk cost fallacy.

      COBOL programs are fucking simplistic. Now throw in IMS/DC/DB, CICS, JCL, SQL preprocessors, and a 40 year old custom development environment/process, (No not ISPF) and those are just the top of the MVS/ZOS iceberg -- life does start to suck. But even so, most COBOL apps boil down to read a record, write a record and that shit isn't rocket science and not even really computer science, just dater processing.

    20. Re: Would you even be looking for a job? by Joey+Vegetables · · Score: 1

      Not all of Michigan can fairly be described as third-world. Parts of Detroit, Flint, etc. are much worse. :)

  13. Stupid question by Nidi62 · · Score: 2

    Stupid question here, but if big businesses are having all of their older, experienced programmers retiring and none of their younger programmers have the skills, why aren't they paying to train people that already work for them? Seems like that would be a lot easier and cheaper, plus they have the added bonus of already knowing what your business does/needs and how it works.

    --
    The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    1. Re:Stupid question by goose-incarnated · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Stupid question here, but if big businesses are having all of their older, experienced programmers retiring and none of their younger programmers have the skills, why aren't they paying to train people that already work for them? Seems like that would be a lot easier and cheaper, plus they have the added bonus of already knowing what your business does/needs and how it works.

      Why [ay to train when you can make vague promises to the under-employed programmers who then train themselves on their own dime. Hell, you won't even need to hire all of them, just the best 10%.

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    2. Re:Stupid question by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 2

      Better question: why aren't they rewriting this stuff?

      This is technical debt, a particular type of risk that piles up over time unless mitigated by taking other risks. Technical debt occurs when you solve a problem with a less-than-optimal solution to avoid a cost--whether that be time, money, or risk. Time isn't a factor here; rather, it's expense (small) and risk (large).

      Banks pay quite a lot for maintenance of these systems, and can afford redevelopment. It's not that they're loaded with money, but rather that redevelopment isn't much more expensive (and is possibly short-term cheaper) than maintenance. Because time isn't a factor, a slow approach expending little cost per time--stretch the schedule to accommodate the available budget per quarter--would allow for redevelopment at about any cost constraint; and an agile delivery method integrating the old system onto a new baseline and delivering new components over time would allow better testing, earlier (partial) deployment, and risk mitigation.

      Instead, they add new components, adapt to new regulatory needs, and write bits in Java and C and whatever. They cobble components together, integrate with other systems, and somehow get their complex and expensive code base to talk to another system written in Python to provide online banking. They keep dragging the whole thing on while adding more glue code and more core functions.

      Somebody says it's not broken; everybody sort of shuffles around and tries not to mention that it might break if you sneeze too hard, and that it might not be easy to put it back together. If it's expensive to maintain and carrying the risk of minimal professional knowledge available in the field, it's broken: it's a huge risk waiting to bring immense monetary, regulatory, and reputational damage to your organization, and you're paying excessively to keep it around instead of trying to replace it.

    3. Re:Stupid question by jythie · · Score: 1

      Part of the problem is, it wasn't really an suboptimal solution. It has worked really well, with the problem being that the industry has moved on and does not produce new programmers with the same 'hit the ground running' skills. But the technical solution has uptime that modern frameworks can only dream of.

    4. Re:Stupid question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stupid question here, but if big businesses are having all of their older, experienced programmers retiring and none of their younger programmers have the skills, why aren't they paying to train people that already work for them? Seems like that would be a lot easier and cheaper, plus they have the added bonus of already knowing what your business does/needs and how it works.

      Today, the IT world is so vast and complex that most people have to specialize, so you don't have IT departments full of workers that are interchangeable, and no one is interchangeable with that COBOL dinosaur in the corner who's about 7 minutes away from retirement.

      The reason there are no younger programmers today is because no one wants to learn that shit.

    5. Re:Stupid question by hey! · · Score: 1

      Because employment is a short term thing these days.

      Getting a job used to be like getting married. It wasn't unusual to get a job at a place (the mill, Big Blue, the bank) in your 20s, and retire from that place forty years later. People changed employers maybe three times in their career. The average today according to BLS is twelve, with the average duration 4.2 years, and the trend is toward even shorter term employment.

      If someone is going to work for you for ten or more years, you might well invest in them because you'll reap the benefits later. Companies have more of a "just in time" mentality too. IF they need specialized skills they'd rather hire them, then let them go. So even if you are technically an employee, you've got to think more like a contractor.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    6. Re:Stupid question by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      Oh, you can architect software that way; it just takes one hell of a lot of investment. It's not so much expensive as it is time-intensive and procedural. This is where you use project management to the fullest, you have a real QA team, you have disaster recovery and hot sites, and all that. Those things are all products of risk decisions, and the requirements here dictate a large investment in risk mitigation.

      This is the kind of system for which you produce architectural documents first; you build test suites; and you ensure your organizational history is archived, indexed, and maintained by a dedicated department. It's not just about writing good code; it's about not flying by the seat of your pants on a system nobody understands with a bunch of very smart people who can tinker with it until it works and hope it doesn't break again.

    7. Re:Stupid question by Comrade+Ogilvy · · Score: 2

      Better question: why aren't they rewriting this stuff?

      Because the actual requirements are pretty complex and easily underestimated. If you underestimate the complexity of a core system, the replacement project will be very expensive and could easily fail regardless of how much you pay. What makes it worse is these services shops like Accenture love big messy projects with vague requirements because they can make bank on the endless late game change requests that are necessary for the system to be usable.

      It is not actually rare for big companies like banks and insurance companies to blow $50-100 million on replacement projects that fail. Literally. But the cost are rolled into some generic multiyear infrastructure improvement project and the CIT is forced out. Bummer.

    8. Re: Stupid question by datavirtue · · Score: 2

      Absolute bullshit. Some processors like TSYS have rewritten this shit several times and use Java. Mastercard has had outages of their COBOL mainframe stack several times in the last few years.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    9. Re:Stupid question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stupid question here, but if big businesses are having all of their older, experienced programmers retiring and none of their younger programmers have the skills, why aren't they paying to train people that already work for them? Seems like that would be a lot easier and cheaper, plus they have the added bonus of already knowing what your business does/needs and how it works.

      Today, the IT world is so vast and complex that most people have to specialize, so you don't have IT departments full of workers that are interchangeable, and no one is interchangeable with that COBOL dinosaur in the corner who's about 7 minutes away from retirement.

      The reason there are no younger programmers today is because no one wants to learn that shit.

      The COBOL dinosaur is getting paid shit and still there getting paid shit because he can't go anyplace else. And no one wants to learn that shit because the pay is shit and they'll be stuck in the same damn cubical working for bosses singing the mantra: "Be happy you have a job!"

    10. Re:Stupid question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Better question: why aren't they rewriting this stuff?

      Because too many damn developers think that floating point can be used for accounting. And those are the only kind of developer that legacy COBOL shops are willing to hire.

    11. Re:Stupid question by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 2

      Absolutely true. You implement systems like this in an incremental manner, with parallel deployment so you can thoroughly test. Basically, you form the foundations first, then begin building components, and create adapters to connect your existing system to these new components where they replace parts of the old one; and you run this stuff side by side, duplicating all actions so you can compare results from both systems. Each time you've sufficiently demonstrated a subset of components, you replace production with the new stack.

      It's not cheap, and it's not easy; it's something you do when the risk of maintaining legacy is getting too big.

      Programs are connected sets of operations and projects to fulfill a common business need; each project is a finite, well-defined, planned, and temporary endeavor. No project should vary its scope unless some risk event makes the prior scope unusable; changes within scope are common and natural, and your project needs a change control board to determine if and how to make those changes.

      Unscrupulous project management shops with little technical expertise will suck your business dry by proclaiming that "the customer is always right!" and doing whatever you ask. As a project manager, it is your job to discover what your client wants--not what they're asking for, but what they expect to achieve. If they want you to build something and it won't achieve their purposes, you push back. They can cut the contract or force things through their executive suites if they want, and it's your job to drive them that far if they're trying to make unnecessary and damaging scope changes that will harm their business and ultimately cause the project to fail by delivering something not appropriate or functional.

      They call that "Agile"; that's not agile. Iterative and incremental delivery is agile: show each workable unit so the customer can test, analyze, and give feedback before you go basing the next piece on that. This increases customer interaction frequency and reduces risk by continuously validating that the project is developing as expected and actually fits the needs of the business and the product. Running around with no plan and no governance isn't agile; it's bullshit.

      Of course I like to get shit done; a lot of people seem to just like money.

    12. Re:Stupid question by Comrade+Ogilvy · · Score: 1

      Unscrupulous project management shops with little technical expertise will suck your business dry by proclaiming that "the customer is always right!" and doing whatever you ask. As a project manager, it is your job to discover what your client wants--not what they're asking for, but what they expect to achieve. If they want you to build something and it won't achieve their purposes, you push back. They can cut the contract or force things through their executive suites if they want, and it's your job to drive them that far if they're trying to make unnecessary and damaging scope changes that will harm their business and ultimately cause the project to fail by delivering something not appropriate or functional.

      They call that "Agile"; that's not agile. Iterative and incremental delivery is agile: show each workable unit so the customer can test, analyze, and give feedback before you go basing the next piece on that. This increases customer interaction frequency and reduces risk by continuously validating that the project is developing as expected and actually fits the needs of the business and the product. Running around with no plan and no governance isn't agile; it's bullshit.

      Of course I like to get shit done; a lot of people seem to just like money.

      In a nutshell, it sounds like you know your stuff. But project managers with your perspective and sufficient subject area expertise (or team with experts who can assist) are not easy to find, apparently.

      I would emphasize your point that "the customer is always right" can be a CYA gambit for bad behavior. I would also say that services shops that brag about CMM5 are often playing a variant of the same game. After all, it is really not that difficult to find contractors who can document their work precisely if given extremely explicit and detailed instructions; what is genuinely valuable are those who can achieve good results for the customer in the face of ambiguity.

    13. Re:Stupid question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a crusty old legacy system (and some of these systems are pretty horrendous) but the mainframe-COBOL combination actually works quite well for high-volume transaction processing systems. Mainframe bashing got trendy in the 1990s but they're actually very good transaction processing platforms - just expensive. Folks stick with this technology because it does certain things very well.

      It is possible to build maintainable COBOL systems, and some outfits have actually done that. There are also plenty of Heath-Robinson contraptions running business-critical applications, but that is true of modern platforms as well.

    14. Re: Stupid question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Worldpay's core payments processing platform is written in COBOL running on IBM mainframes and has had 19 minutes of unscheduled downtime in 24 years. I doubt you will ever get that from Java or .Net - the application and platform stacks are just too complex and have much looser change control policies.

      The key here is the conservative change control policy. Because Java and .Net have some pretentions to being used as leading edge systems they are in a race to add features. Stability is in tension against fast evolution. A parallel example is the differences between Linux and BSD. The value of the BSD family is rooted in their conservative change control policies. BSD is popular amongst folks wanting stable network infrastructure but it's substantially behind Linux in terms of platform support.

      The value of a platform such as an IBM mainframe is that the technology is focused on doing one thing well - high-volume, high-availability transaction processing. The vendor manages its product's feature set and change control policy towards doing that well - and still guarantees parts availability for 40 years on the Z series. It's viable because there is still a large market prepared to pay a premium price for that capability. Having legacy software on the platform adds an exit barrier but if the platform was really not fit for purpose the customers would move off it.

      IIRC IBM has about 10,000 customers running mainframes and 125,000 customers running iSeries machines. They provide a range of interoperability technologies to interface these systems with peripheral applications running on other platforms. You can front a mainframe application with a web front-end in Java or some other platform quite readily. If you want a stable platform for some sort of mission-critical application then you could do a lot worse.

    15. Re:Stupid question by Comrade+Ogilvy · · Score: 1

      Another factor: relevant in house expertise.

      I would further add that core system replacement project management is effectively a rare skillset. There are reasons that these big giant companies avoid replacing these systems for 25+ years. Of course the time comes that it needs to be done. Then what? Well, nobody who who did the deed 25 years ago works here anymore.

      If I need to buy a new car, that is a significant cost to me, but I can easily find lots of excellent advice from people who have experience on the topic. If I need to buy a house, that is a huge event in my life that does not happen often, but, again, I can easily find lots of excellent advice.

      If I am Citibank and I want to replace a core system there may only be a few hundred people on the planet with truly relevant experience of working in such a complex crufty system and keeping the plane flying while replacing the wings. And, of course, for Citibank, there are all kinds of reasons, good and bad, that so-and-so's experience in that bank over there might be argued to not apply to a big important company like Citibank. Do you dare go outside and hire on a team of people for resumes that sort of apply? Do you dare stick with the people inside the company that you at least you know but lack certain key experience? Tough call.

    16. Re:Stupid question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Re: "...why aren't they paying to train people ..."

      The problem in this statement is the word "paying". Businesses these days aren't about the paying, they are about the taking!

      OK, I'm being facetious. The issue is that you aren't thinking like a hiring manager. There's a large element of Group Think among these people and their behavior patterns are predictable. They are governed by 2 (at least, in this instance) rules:

      1). If I spend X$, what am I getting for the money?
      2). We don't pay to train. We can externalize that cost and our competitors do this too. Therefore, never pay to train.

      Now, it's entirely possible that your suggestion would make personnel costs cheaper overall, but that's the problem. The decision makers in large companies aren't responsible for overall costs, they are only responsible for costs in their division, department or function. And by the time you get high enough in the command structure for overall decision-making, the decision-makers are too high in the command structure to be bothered with details like this. They have already hired layers of people under them to make those decisions, and if the Big Boss has to make those decisions, why did the Big Boss hire the underlings, only to sideline them when it counts?

      In large bureaucracies, salary costs for positions are considered "sunk costs". The big fights, and most managerial attention, concerns the efforts to get positions created. Hiring the individual, or paying to train them (not tech skills, but company culture, local practices, specific systems implementations) doesn't attract much attention. Everyone expects "new faces" to be unproductive for a while, though there's a whole seductive and hypocritical trend to want talent to "hit the ground running".

      Wrapping this up. Even if a corporation has to pay a premium for a new hire, they can politically and intellectually justify that based upon, "we are getting a new person". So there's the value proposition, and corporate cultures are often uninterested in looking closer at the value-for-the-money story.

      But to spend money on training an existing employee? No. That falls afoul of Rule #2 and it looks bad in relation to Rule #1 too. Namely, 'we already employ this person, so we have them at our disposal, and now we are spending extra $ on them so that we can... continue to employ them? We can do that without spending the extra $, so don't spend the extra $.'

      I'm not saying that your argument can't be made. What I'm saying is that simpler arguments often win over more complex ones. These environments are political and the fights are political. Simply doing the right thing often isn't enough and won't carry the day.

  14. not again! they don't want COBOL they want CICS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    oh, not again ... they do not want COBOL programmers, they want programmers who know CICS transactions and DB2, VSAM, etc, who have enough experience to come in and fix production business logic ... I see this article every year or two and it's ... let's all say it together ... NOT COBOL PROGRAMMERS ANYONE WANTS ... if you know COBOL but don't know CICS, you will not get a job... and, hey, there is a huge glut of out of work CICS experts to pick from.

    1. Re:not again! they don't want COBOL they want CICS by Archtech · · Score: 1

      there is a huge glut of out of work CICS experts to pick from.

      Hmmm. Let's think about that for about seven seconds. "A huge glut", you say. That implies that many of the CICS experts who used to be needed have become redundant. (Even though many will have died or retired, considerabl;y diminishing the size of the pool).

      How can that be unless many or most of the existing CICS systems have been retired? And, you know, they haven't - because no one has the time and money to recreate them.

      --
      I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
    2. Re:not again! they don't want COBOL they want CICS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oh, not again ... they do not want COBOL programmers, they want programmers who know CICS transactions and DB2, VSAM, etc, who have enough experience to come in and fix production business logic ... I see this article every year or two and it's ... let's all say it together ... NOT COBOL PROGRAMMERS ANYONE WANTS ... if you know COBOL but don't know CICS, you will not get a job... and, hey, there is a huge glut of out of work CICS experts to pick from.

      So true

    3. Re:not again! they don't want COBOL they want CICS by pgmrdlm · · Score: 1

      Damn, even where I work which has it's claims system written in Cobol. I haven't heard CICS, VSAM(Remember ISAM). Lol, I also worked with IMS. That made all other database structures easy to understand. What do you mean a relational database is hard. shittttttttttttttttttttt, nada but a thang.

      --
      Anonymous comments are as pathetic as the anonymous "sources" that contaminate gutless journalism from the New York Time
  15. Re:First? by Mikkeles · · Score: 1

    You're using COBOL, right?

    --
    Great minds think alike; fools seldom differ.
  16. And then there's JCL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ah, the old days...

  17. I do & probably only 1 of a handful here who d by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I do & probably only 1 of a handful here who do - it was the 2nd language I learned (after BASIC & C came shortly after that). Good news there's work out there for it but I haven't HAD to work for anyone since 2007 running my own business instead since then.

    * I wouldn't trade running my own show for working for ANYONE again EVER if I can help it & so far for a decade++? I've been lucky & have...

    (Occasionally though I will STILL contract if the pay's right & the task @ hand interests me...)

    APK

    P.S.=> There's risk involved however & yes, money too but your TIME is all yours (or rather larger parts of it than when you are someone's dog-collar submitting that most precious quantity time (along w/ health of course being the other))... apk

  18. Re:Do You Know Cobol? If So, There Might Be a Job by DeBaas · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'll learn a language that has an IF MIGHT loop, looks awesome!

    --
    ---
  19. What was Y2K? Chopped liver? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anyone could have seen this coming, especially as all those people that saved the day at the turn of the century are reaching retirement age.

  20. Windows XP will be the next COBOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Especially in China. Nearly 5 years EOL and 10% market share there.

  21. Fortran programmers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's been said, a good Fortran programmer can write good Fortran code in any language, even Cobol.

    Outsourcing programming jobs and you'll get outsourced quality code, in any language. Hi quality programs requires high quality programmers, or at least exceptional program specs, change and quality/test procedures in place.

  22. Re:Do You Know Cobol? If So, There Might Be a Job by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perhaps you should look at Intercal, then. No "IF MIGHT" but constructs that perform (or do they?) similarly.

  23. WORKING STORAGE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cosby today going to working storage. Kavanaugh soon.

  24. There isn't enough money in the world by IWantMoreSpamPlease · · Score: 1

    To make me go back to programming COBOL on mainframes.
    I did it for 3 years. I still have the 9mm scars as a consequence. /h (maybe)

    --
    So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds.
  25. COBOL better than Python, etc by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    COBOL powers the finances of the world for the past many decades. Meanwhile trash like Python, C#, Swift, etc come and go every day once the latest language that brings nothing new comes out.

    1. Re:COBOL better than Python, etc by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ^This.

  26. What a great security feature... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hacker: WTF is this?

  27. They used to have training programs. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Back in the day, the big Hartford insurers had training programs- COBOL and CICS. Requirements: HS diploma and passing their training program. Then a six month probation period.

    They never had to bitch about "not finding any qualified people". Then they would have massive layoffs every few years and programmers would play musical chairs and some Aetna people would end up at Travelers and some Travelers people would end up at The Hartford and so on and so around town.

    Today, we poor slobs would have to go a take classes on our own dime - and still get rejected because we don't have on the job experience.

    I wish I never went into technology. Having a blast programming as a kid and thinking that my career would be like that was just youthful stupidity.

    Employers were much more realistic back then.

  28. Re:First? by slickwillie · · Score: 4, Funny

    He would have been first if he didn't have to type all that stuff:

    IDENTIFICATION DIVISION.
    PROGRAM-ID. FIRST.
    PROCEDURE DIVISION.
    DISPLAY 'First'.
    STOP RUN.

  29. MOD DOWN Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    MODDOWN! ; creimer karma whoring sock puppet post again!

    CREIMER' SUBMISSIONS UPDATE:
    Note also that creimer is trying to regain karma by getting his submissions published as articles on /. so make sure to go to:
    https://slashdot.org/~The+Orig...
    https://slashdot.org/~cre1mer
    https://slashdot.org/~The+Fat+...
    https://slashdot.org/~__aaclcg...
    https://slashdot.org/~IDrinkFa...
    https://slashdot.org/~_sharp'r...
    https://slashdot.org/~crreimer
    https://slashdot.org/~cdreimer
    https://slashdot.org/~criss69
    https://slashdot.org/~Anonymou...
    https://slashdot.org/~FatCashe...
    https://slashdot.org/~ILoveFat...
    https://slashdot.org/~IHateFat...
    https://slashdot.org/~IAteFatC...
    https://slashdot.org/~ITapeFat...
    https://slashdot.org/~IApeFatC...
    https://slashdot.org/~IPrayFat...
    https://slashdot.org/~FatCashe...
    and mod down his submissions as well. The great thing is that you don't even need mod points to mod down a submission, just click on the "minus" icon!

    Yes, believe it or not, creimer owns all the above sock puppet accounts. It is a mystery why Slashdot management tolerates it!

    creimer wrote:

    I don't bother with mod points. I'm doing something much more sinister. It took ten story submissions ? I'll have to double check the number ? to move cdreimer's karma from neutral to excellent without ever being exposed to the capricious mods. Mmmmmwwwwahahahahahahaha!

    https://slashdot.org/comments....

    Danger, Will Robinson, Danger! Creimy is posting more than 2 posts a day. Hurry! mod down otherwise /. will go to hell again!

    Note: you can mod down even if already at -1 to lower karma and to prevent lost /. users to accidentally mod up.

    creimer wrote:

    All you need to do is find a website with a permissive TOS, say, Slashdot, create a Python script to scrape your own comments, sprinkle Amazon affiliate links in various posts, and then re-post past links whenever possible. Won't be long before you start making "coffee money" each month.

    https://slashdot.org/comments....

    C.D. Reimer is a renowned Slashdot collaborator, as he puts it himself; "Because of the quality of my posts and my article submissions, I'm a highly rated commentator and moderator."

    But does anybody ever wondered what "C.D." stands for? Well, it stands for Creimy Dumpty of course!

    Creimy Dumpty sat on the wall,
    Creimy Dumpty had a great fall.
    All the king's horses
    And all the king's men
    Couldn't put Creimy Dumpty
    Together again.

    Creimy's siblings video and theme song, very realistic, especially the pants, just like Creimy's:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    With "Vice President Pence Vowing US Astronauts Will Return To the Moon", we are sure they will need miracle workers up there, here i

    1. Re:MOD DOWN Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here is what is much worse than laziness alone; some people are lazy and stupid

      For example, take creimer and his stupid and dead youtube channel that was supposed to be his long tail revenue stream for his retirement.

      He has been told several times that he should finish his certifications instead but he is too lazy to do that and he finds it easier to post stupid stuff on YouTube.

      Since nobody watches his stupid stuff. He decided to publish a border line kid video that he filmed himself. Then he posted in various forums, faking outrage to bring views to his channel arguing with himself with different sock puppets names.

      Here is basically what it looked like:
      creimer wrote:
      https://slashdot.org/comments....

      Have you seen creimer's children band video [youtu.be]? Holy shit! That video got hundreds of view [twitter.com] with 95% coming from outside of the United States and the top three nations are well known for sex tourism. It doesn't surprise me that Slashdot has so many pedobears.

      and:
      https://slashdot.org/comments....

      No. Thanks to YOU for calling me a pedophile. It has become my best performing video in the first 24 hours to date. All those views came from OUTSIDE the United States. Ukraine being 11% of the total.

      and:
      https://slashdot.org/comments....

      Thanks to your Pedobear buddies, I got 25 hours of watch time in three days and coming in second to my Slashdot video with 30 hours of watch time in six months. Keep up the good work!

      So basically creimer, you are bragging about providing video material to pedophiles and sex tourists and you do not see any problems with it as long as it brings views to your youtube channel.

      Poor Chris, sad, very sad...

      How long will it be before you do the right thing and take that video off line?

      update: see creimer's replies here:
      https://tech.slashdot.org/comm...

      https://news.slashdot.org/comm...

      https://slashdot.org/comments....

      https://tech.slashdot.org/comm...

  30. COBOL Has Advantages by sycodon · · Score: 5, Informative

    You can be a snobby all you want about your C and SQL databases, but one thing two combinations will never do is what COBOL does every night, weekly, etc.

    That is process millions...I mean MILLIONS of records in a single night, producing bills, checks, statements, etc.

    COBOL is optimized for record processing, not pretty pictures, drop down menus, HTML, etc.

    COBOL has once focus:

    1. Get the data in
    2. Transform it
    3. Get the data back out.

    COBOL can slice and dice data in ways C and SQL can't even dream of.

    You don't write Websites in COBOL. You do the serious work that involves billions of dollars of transactions. Reliably, repeatedly.

    --
    When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    1. Re:COBOL Has Advantages by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 1

      COBOL can slice and dice data in ways C and SQL can't even dream of.

      But then again, so could almost any other decent general-purpose computer language.

      (But without all that boilerplate and flowery prose syntax.)

    2. Re:COBOL Has Advantages by jythie · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yeah, I used to feel the same way about FORTRAN, then I discovered you could do the same tasks in Python with the right library, far more readable, and only marginally less efficient.

    3. Re:COBOL Has Advantages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      COBOL can slice and dice data in ways C and SQL can't even dream of.

      Of all the things that are said of COBOL, I've never seen power/flexibility among them. Seriously, could you give examples? It would radically change my impression of COBOL.

    4. Re:COBOL Has Advantages by sycodon · · Score: 2

      Not the same way.

      Read up on the Redefines features.

      Slice and dice before the code so your code isn't cluttered with Mid, Left, Right, Strip, etc.

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    5. Re:COBOL Has Advantages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You don't write Websites in COBOL. You do the serious work that involves billions of dollars of transactions. Reliably, repeatedly.

      Uh, no you don't, because everyone knows in the 21st Century the answer for this is blockchain. Doesn't matter if all you're building is a fucking toilet that needs to be able to flush reliably and repeatedly, it better be blockchain-enabled.

      Blockchain! It's what's for dinner. It's what Nike now uses to Just Do It. It's what Donald Trump snorts every day before tweeting. It's what makes Charlie Sheen a Winner. It's what makes Soylent Green!

      Blockchain!

    6. Re:COBOL Has Advantages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      COBOL can slice and dice data in ways C and SQL can't even dream of.

      But then again, so could almost any other decent general-purpose computer language.

      (But without all that boilerplate and flowery prose syntax.)

      COBOL's greatest advantage over C and its decedents is no IEEE 754, floating point arithmetic "issues." Granted the precision may be viewed as "negligible," but not for penny pinchers. Now, the problem with the precision is taxed on the programmer to do their math/algorithm correctly.

    7. Re:COBOL Has Advantages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow. MILLIONS of records in a single night! Unbelievable! You'd need a SUPERCOMPUTER to process such a massive amount of data!

      And COBOL can read data, transform it, and get the data back out? GOOD LORD! No programming language in the history of humanity has ever been able to do that! Especially not with MILLIONS of records in a single night!

      It sounds even more powerful than DOS BATCH LANGUAGE!

      Sarcasm off for a moment:

      COBOL's real strength is that it caught on so early that huge amounts of code has been written that would be expensive to rewrite, especially when taking into account the amount of audit work that would be required in the fields COBOL took off in.

      It's not powerful. People don't write websites in COBOL not because somehow websites aren't "serious" but because COBOL is a crude, inflexible, language incapable of doing that kind of work efficiently. Likewise desktop applications can't easily be written in COBOL either.

      Nobody considers COBOL for new projects at this stage, companies that need a fast, efficient, language that multiple programmers can maintain, that's auditable and reliable, generally pick Java or C#. There is literally nothing you can do in COBOL you can't do in Java or C#, and as a rule both options will do it more efficiently, and allow you to integrate that work into modern processes.

    8. Re:COBOL Has Advantages by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 1

      That's great if all of your strings are of fixed length, like in some kind of 1960s punched card stack.

    9. Re:COBOL Has Advantages by Archtech · · Score: 3, Funny

      That's the funniest thing I have read about software since the IT director who was quoted as saying, "We're going with XML because it's the fastest Internet protocol".

      And that wasn't Dilbert - that was real life.

      --
      I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
    10. Re:COBOL Has Advantages by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 1

      COBOL's greatest advantage over C and its decedents is no IEEE 754, floating point arithmetic "issues." Granted the precision may be viewed as "negligible," but not for penny pinchers. Now, the problem with the precision is taxed on the programmer to do their math/algorithm correctly.

      That's only seen as an advantage because accountants are such decimal chauvinists.

      It there were 64 cents in a dollar, they'd have no problem with IEEE 754 math, since any errors introduced by the algorithm would be the exact same errors they would get by doing the problem with paper and pencil. (They want to see familiar errors, not unfamiliar ones. The familiar errors are defined by accountants to be "correct".).

    11. Re:COBOL Has Advantages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      XML was really just going in the other extreme, leveraging HTML. People tired of interfacing with COBOL transactional fixed length systems, or people hearing about the dreadful stories, created XML.

      Two wrongs don't make a right!

    12. Re:COBOL Has Advantages by PPH · · Score: 1

      You do the serious work that involves billions of dollars of transactions.

      Meh. A slow day on Wall Street. What do the big exchanges use? Learn that. Probably not a batch oriented language and underlying system. Something that can support event-driven high frequency trading.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    13. Re:COBOL Has Advantages by slack_justyb · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But then again, so could almost any other decent general-purpose computer language.

      Depends but honestly, not really. I've worked C++, Java, COBOL and RPGLE. Most modern languages are general purpose like you said, and as such have to have libraries and what not added to them to make them SQL/Database/sockets etc aware. COBOL and RPGLE are pretty much specifically written to work with files/tables/transformations. Of course, the trade off is that those two languages become horrible for things outside that task.

      Good example. In RPGLE database tables are files (actually the file concept came way before the table concept but I digress). You treat then just like you would any other file. Want a struct that matches the layout of a file (database table) you just define it to be like that file.

      dcl-ds SomeStruct likerec( SomeRec : *all ) inz;

      That's it. When you update the layout of the table, a quick recompile of the program updates the program too with no code change. You don't have to add getters, you don't have to add setters, none of that stuff that would be needed in Java or C++. If you want to store something from the database in that struct its

      read SomeStruct SomeRec;

      Change some values and then to update that changes back to the database

      SomeStruct.SomeField = 'New Value';
      update SomeStruct SomeRec;

      COBOL is pretty much the same way except the op-codes are a bit more verbose as you indicated. Again, I'm not saying RPGLE or COBOL are better than C++ or Java or what have you. What I am saying is that they are languages that were developed for a very specific purpose and as such they are incredibly honed into doing that purpose quickly.

      COBOL can slice and dice data in ways C and SQL can't even dream of.

      I think that's a bit overselling it. Even the best COBOL can be emulated in C++, the catch is that somethings in COBOL are made a lot more complicated in C++. One thing is that COBOL has built-in understanding of how to build reports that will be printed. That's because COBOL was made to specifically address that kind of stuff so it's no wonder that in COBOL you can instruct a report to be printed with a single line of code. You can do roughly the same in C++ or Java but you're pulling in a ton of libraries to get that done.

      Again, the folks who have used RPGLE and COBOL all their life, they'll swear by it. And I get it. For things like taking in massive amounts of records and doing the exact same operation on upteen billion records, RPGLE and COBOL cannot be beat because they were written to do exactly that. However, want to do some cool website UI? Yeah, RPGLE and COBOL are horrible choices to do that in. Want to do some sort of RESTful API? .NET/Java/Shit probably an abacus are all going to be way better choices than RPGLE or COBOL. The two are very, very specific languages in what they will and won't do, and processing billions upon billions of records like Charlie Sheen processes lines of cocaine, is exactly what these languages have had the last four to five decades to refine. You'll be incredibly hard pressed to find compiled output that matches their speed, that used a HLL outside of them.

    14. Re: COBOL Has Advantages by datavirtue · · Score: 1

      Not flexible. That's why it is still around.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    15. Re:COBOL Has Advantages by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Well, the mainframes that do this work do not act like PCs. They are optimized for fast I/O rather than fast processing. Part of writing good mainframe code is in knowing how to optimally use the machine, and much of that isn't even in COBOL it's in all the stuff that goes around it (JCL, etc).

    16. Re:COBOL Has Advantages by dwywit · · Score: 1

      All of that. And RPG stands for Report Program Generator. It's a language originally written to process in batch-mode. It's even got a built-in cycle, you don't have to tell it to READ a file, that's what it'll do when you give it a file name. Of course there are specific read functions (and derivatives), but it gives you an idea of its design. It's damn fast, too.

      Now, getting it to process things interactively, like a terminal screen, that's a bit clumsy, and another language would be preferable.

      --
      They sentenced me to twenty years of boredom
    17. Re:COBOL Has Advantages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I used to feel the same way about FORTRAN, then I discovered you could do the same tasks in Python with the right library, far more readable, and only marginally less efficient.

      I'd be curious to see that put to the test in a statistically meaningful way.

      And not, as a junior idiot programmer I once got fired tried to do by running his badly written algorithm (using mod and div using barely first semester quality code) against mine (using bit-shift operations) by running it exactly once, but instead several thousand (minimum) iterations.

      This was literally something we gave him to prove he could code -- when I reviewed his code and said "you need to use the following things because your way it too slow and cumbersome and is far too long for what it does", he insisted his code was every but as fast and good as mine. He argued with me until I proved to him mine over 10,000 iterations was about 100x faster. He also proved to have a memory leak.

      When management listened to him trying to say that he was just as right as I was -- despite me giving him empirical results that were irrefutable, he still wouldn't back down -- he was basically told "if you're not going to listen to him, you're missing the point" and shown the door.

      Most people who say "only marginally less efficient" are actually NOT aware of how you really measure it, and I've see a LOT of instances where if you measure over a large set of runs the one who was claiming it was "almost" as efficient standing there sputtering as they get proven wrong -- usually by at least an order of magnitude.

      Never underestimate just how much faster lean, stripped out, and optimized code is versus going through a bunch of libraries you think are just as efficient -- especially if you haven't proven it yet.

    18. Re:COBOL Has Advantages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where i work there is CICS service that builds a HTML page in a COBOL program. its about 10k lines and most of it is MOVE statements. The worst thing is its only about 3 years old, apparently they wanted something that was maintainable by the COBOL devs.

    19. Re:COBOL Has Advantages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unlike most viewers of this thread, I've actually had to read RPG. I'm pretty sure it stands for Reeking Putrid Garbage.

    20. Re:COBOL Has Advantages by Krishnoid · · Score: 1

      So based on that focus, it's a very practical extraction and reporting language?

    21. Re:COBOL Has Advantages by slack_justyb · · Score: 2

      It's even got a built-in cycle, you don't have to tell it to READ a file, that's what it'll do when you give it a file name

      Indeed the cycle is still there for OPM, but if you want ILE you have to ditch the cycle. OPM biggest use is exactly what you said, if you want to batch process a massive load of records. Where I'm at there's still some programs that use cycle because we load up data sent in from all the branches, doesn't matter if the file is 1,000 records or 100,000,000 records the batch for each branch is so quick the timing is considered to trivial.

      Now, getting it to process things interactively, like a terminal screen

      That gets more into where you'd used ILE to break things up into pieces. Granted, there hasn't been any motion to move away from DDS for TN5250, but with PCML and node.js now integrated into the stack, you can code a service program to build JSON and then send that to the IFS and have the UI done up by node.js programmers. Or if JS isn't your thing, there's Zend server that can speak to COBOL or RPG ILE via PCML, again though, you really want to be outside the cycle for any of that to be less than nightmarish.

      But biggest thing is that you have a choice in which mode you want to run in, cycle is still king for a ton of ETL. But ILE makes more sense for larger, more complex projects. But it's still good that we have a choice.

    22. Re:COBOL Has Advantages by djinn6 · · Score: 1

      Seriously? Millions of records overnight is 230 records per second. I think even JS running on a cell phone could handle that.

      Any implementation in a respectable programming language would be bounded by IO, not CPU or lack of programmers.

    23. Re:COBOL Has Advantages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only reason people think that COBOL does this kind of data processing better than anything else is because they have no experience with anything else, or if they do, they made no serious attempt to write these tasks in any other language. If all you had ever seen were horses and buggies and had never seen a car, just heard about it, you'd probably think your thoroughbred was faster than a sports car. Don't get me wrong, COBOL programs are still critical, and so are the programmers that maintain them, but that's not because the language is somehow "better."

      The focus on the financial industry ignores all the other industries that do this kind of processing on a daily basis. Do you think CERN uses COBOL for physics research? Does Cisco use COBOL for packet monitoring, or does AT&T use it for handling phone traffic? All of that requires ETL processing at that level too, yet you don't see a single new project in COBOL where the business does not already depend on COBOL. Many businesses rely on ERP systems or third-party accounting packages, like SAP and the like, to handle their finances. The underpinning of SAP is all Java and C, not COBOL. Many businesses adapt SAP to use COBOL, but SAP itself, is not written in COBOL, which means that regardless of where the money is going, it didn't originate from anything in COBOL.

      Even if all of the above were false, the limitations posed by the mainframe are the only reason that you could ever argue that COBOL is any better. Records are fixed width, programs are not interactive, they can't handle Unicode in most cases, and you have to manually figure out what disk, track, and sector your data lives on. If you had the same requirements in C, then yes, doing it in C would be just as fast as doing it in COBOL. Thus, what we're not comparing is languages, but environments.

      Comparing any modern language to COBOL is like comparing COBOL to assembly. People still argue whether hand-written assembly is faster. But it's so brittle and limited that people moved on from it long ago. It may do one thing well, but the other languages can do other things too... so just like assembly, people are slowly replacing these systems because the rest of the world has moved on to something else that can do more.

    24. Re:COBOL Has Advantages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... and only marginally less efficient.

      Those inefficiencies really stack up when processing millions of results though

    25. Re:COBOL Has Advantages by jythie · · Score: 1

      This is true, and there is always room for taking a close look at those tightly wound paths that need to execute over and over. But more often than not, the savings there tend to come from how the path is structured as opposed to which language it was written in.

    26. Re:COBOL Has Advantages by jythie · · Score: 1

      Heh. I spent a great deal of my career working on problems that came down to 'shaving off 2ms means this works or does not' or 'you have a hard memory limit of X before trashing will render the application unusable', so I do indeed put in the elbow grease to verify if something really does behave well enough or not. What I have generally found is that the language and library writers tend to be pretty good. Python has a pretty large scientific computing community where time is money and if you use the number crunching libraries correctly they can actually be surprisingly efficient even when compared to custom rolled solutions in C or FORTRAN. When you have something specialized that REALLY needs to be tiny and fast it can still be best to switch to other languages, but even then it can be difficult to match the work of the library authors without putting in similar amounts of time and effort.

  31. Re:First? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ever heard of a decent editor? Use macros and you don't actually have to type all those words in full. Djeebus, youngsters these days!

  32. easy.. by SuperDre · · Score: 1

    If you already really know how to code it shouldn't be a problem to learn cobol in a short time. We had in our IT classes, and I thought it to be a breeze..

  33. Re:First? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As opposed to a bunch of Imports or Using statements, class declarations, etc?

  34. Learning COBOL is easy by Toshito · · Score: 1

    Anyone with some coding experience can learn it in a couple of weeks.

    What's more difficult is that every single company has it's own editing/compiling tools, source management, home made subroutines, programming standards, etc...

    Coding for batch processing is a lot different than for a web pages or user applications.

    And forget about the documentation, it has probably been lost in all the movings and restructurations. Some systems are more than 30 years old.

    --
    Try it! Library of Babel
  35. Gotta love banks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When even the most stalwartly government agencies have moved on to more "modern" languages for their stack (Java, Perl, Python, ...), banks still manage to stay behind.

    Even when confronted with the results of that obscurantism, they keep on keeping on, training developers in India and old military personnel to replace their old Cobol programmers. I have high hopes that in 30 years, when even India cannot stomach Cobol anymore, banks will find a way to bring back their now-dead Cobol programmers, because "ripping out mainframes is pricey and complicated".

    Any sufficiently advanced stinginess is indistinguishable from magic. I say let them carry their dreams !

  36. It's a fadso! by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

    These firms are on the hook for correct transactions, screwups of which can cost millions.

    So if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Go away, refactoring busywork generator portion of latest software engineering strategy fad.

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  37. No, COBOL doesn't pay well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    COBOL jobs don't pay that well at all, not in the top 10 and are in fact near the bottom. They take some schmuck who doesn't code, doesn't know the software industry, teach them COBOL, CICS, VSAM, IMS, JCL, and maybe DB2 over a few week and they have someone who can't leave for a higher paying job elsewhere and only knows that particular business and their processes.

  38. Not just COBOL by TomGreenhaw · · Score: 1

    Learning COBOL is not really a big deal. What you need to be successful in that environment is experience with a whole raft of older IBM technologies like MVS, ISAM, SPUFI, MQ, etc. etc., etc... Layer that on top of modern "Get off the mainframe" stuff that emulates these things in a *NIX environment and you begin to realize you need to be Dr. Frankenstein from the past, not a good developer who can pick up yet another language.

    --
    Greed is the root of all evil.
  39. Use marketing BS by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    I've been hearing about COBOL being the new hot job ticket for 20+ years. I haven't seen anyone offer a training, boot camp or workshop in COBOL

    Banks don't want to pay for training, they want plug-and-play staff, and a pony.

    Perhaps they should rename it to sound hip and cool. Stupider things have caught on*. Call it Cloudbol++ or node.bol or Bolockchain.

    * Or applied to the wrong things or places

    1. Re:Use marketing BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since you enjoy chatting with Christopher Dale Reimer aka creimer aka "The Original CDR" so much, I am sure you will enjoy the following story:

      Here is the story of creimy the mountain and his royalties!

      This story was inspired by cdreimer, the parent poster. The story was written by a visionary on cdreimer birth date.

      The story of creimy the mountain explained:
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      Creimy is a typical mountain who poses for postcards, living with his wife Ethel, a tree, between the cities of Rosamund and Gorman, California. The main features on his mountainous face are two large caves, resembling eyes, and a cliff for a jaw, which moves up and down when he talks, puffing up dust and boulders.
      click above link to read more, he even destroyed Edwards Air Force Base just by passing by...

      Listen to the audio version here:
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      "Creimy The Mountain"

      includes quotes from Pomp and Circumstance March No. 1 in D major (Edward Elgar), Johnny's Theme (Paul Anka), Off We Go Into The Wild Blue Yonder (Crawford), O Mein Papa (Paul Burkhard), Over The Rainbow (Harburg/Arlen), Star-Spangled Banner (Smith/Key), Suite: Judy Blue Eyes (Stephen Stills)

      One, two, three

      CREIMY the Mountain
      CREIMY the Mountain
      A regular picturesque
      Postcardy mountain
      Residing between lovely
      Rosamond and Gorman
      With his stunning wife ETHELL, A tree! A tree!

      CREIMY was a mountain ETHELL was a tree Growing off of his shoulder

      CREIMY was a mountain
      (CREIMY was a mountain!)
      ETHELL was a tree Growing off of his shoulder
      (ETHELL was a tree growing off of his shoulder)
      (hey, hey hey!)

      Creimy had two big
      Caves for eyes,
      With a cliff for a jaw
      That would go up 'n down,
      And whenever it did,
      He'd puff out some dust,
      And hack up a boulder (HACK!) Hack up a boulder (HACK! HACK!)
      Hack up a boulder (HACK! HACK! HACK!) Up a boulder

      Now, one day, now I believe it was on a Tuesday, a man in a checkered double-knit suit drove up in a large El Dorado Cadillac, leased from BOB SPREEN

      ("Where the freeways meet in Downey!")

      And he laid a HUGE, BULGING ENVELOPE right at the corner of CREIMY THE MOUNTAIN, that was right where his 'foot' was supposed to be.

      Now, CREIMY THE MOUNTAIN, he couldn't believe it! All those postcards he'd posed for, for ALL OF THOSE YEARS, and finally, now, AT LAST, his Royalties!

      Royalties! Royalties Royalties! Royalty check is in, honey!

      Yes, CREIMY THE MOUNTAIN was RICH! Yes, and his eyeball-caves, they widened in amazement, and his jaw (which was a cliff), well it dropped thirty feet!

      A bunch of dust puffed out! Rocks and boulders hacked up, (hack! hack!) crushing 'The LINCOLN'!

      I gave him the money He acted real funny He hocked up a rock and It TOTALLED my car!

      Oh, do you Know any trucks Might be bound for THE VALLEY?
      I don't wanna stand here All night in this bar (Dear Lord)

      I don't wanna stand here All night in this bar (No shit!)

      I don't wanna stand here All night in this bar!

      By two o'clock, when the bars are already closed down, CREIMY had broken 'THE BIG NEWS' to ETHELL. And with dust and boulders everywhere, CREIMY, choked with excitement, announced

      "ETHELL, we're going on a VACATION!"

      Yes, and they WERE going on a vacation! (Oh, and ETHELL, ETHELL, ETHELL, like every little woman, she of course was very excited! She creaked a little bit, and some old birds flew off of her.) CREIMY told ETHELL they were going to Yes! They were going to NEW YORK!

      "ETHELL, we're going to New York!"

      But first they were gonna stop in LAS VEGAS

      It's off to LAS VEGAS to check out the lounges Pull a few handles,
      And drink a few beers, (Oh, ETHELL!)

      ETHELL, my darling, you know that I love you!
      I'm glad we could ha

    2. Re:Use marketing BS by dwywit · · Score: 1

      Bolock

      Now you're talking.

      --
      They sentenced me to twenty years of boredom
    3. Re:Use marketing BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Many banks, insuarances and government agencies are paying companies like CSC, Unisys and IBM incredible sums for their COBOL devs

  40. Re:Do You Know Cobol? If So, There Might Be a Job by Tablizer · · Score: 2

    Trump would love COBOL; it's usually in all capitals and makes small things sound important, as if you are God commanding an army of millions who don't question orders.

  41. Where Do They Get Their Hardware? by organgtool · · Score: 1

    Banks and other companies have come to the uncomfortable realization that ripping out old mainframes is pricey and complicated

    But where do they get replacement hardware for mainframes and how secure are those supply channels? If it's going to take years to create a newer system, are the channels that provide replacement hardware guaranteed to be in place for the entire duration from the time a replacement project starts (let alone the time management continues to procrastinate in approving a replacement system)? Of course, that's not too likely to happen on the current executive's watch, so it's really a problem for their successors (or at least that's the way they see it).

    1. Re:Where Do They Get Their Hardware? by bws111 · · Score: 1

      The truth is, nobody is really running on old mainframes. They are running on brand new mainframes, most likely ones that have been released in the last five years. The latest mainframe was released just 4 months ago. Mainframes are still in active development, with new models coming out every 1.5-2 years.

    2. Re:Where Do They Get Their Hardware? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A lot of them use IBM mainframes and mini computers which have extensive backwards compatibility. Something else to note is lot of the systems running COBOL also run PL/I. I would venture to say it has become tougher to find PL/I programmers than COBOL programmers. Most US credit unions have a back end running on AIX for the various FIS and Jack Henry and Associates (JHA) products. As far as I know at this time, there is only financial core system running Linux, Corelations. They're relatively young company and have mostly been picking up FIS credit unions but have also won a few JHA Symitar credit unions.

    3. Re:Where Do They Get Their Hardware? by Eravnrekaree · · Score: 1

      They get their new mainframes from IBM of course, which also provides repair parts. Many of them use IBM mainframes for which there is an upgrade path to newer mainframe models built on todays technology. This is the case with the z/OS stuff which originated as System 360. IBM prides itself in full backwards compatability, mostly the case that an app written in 1965 for System 360 should still run on a 2018 IBM mainframe. Upgrading to a new mainframe is a fine solution. mainframes are designed to provide high uptime and are price competitive with commodity hardware

  42. Staying power by Tablizer · · Score: 2

    why aren't they rewriting this stuff?

    Into what? COBOL has lasted 50+ years. How do you know Java or C# or Python will last that long (in viable numbers)? COBOL is kind of like Latin: it's stable because it's a dead language. Scientific taxonomies use Latin because it won't change on them.

    COBOL also has a lot of built-in idioms for business data processing. Java etc. would have to use libraries to get similar, and those libraries may fall out of maintenance even if Java itself lasts.

    1. Re:Staying power by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      COBOL hasn't lasted 50 years; it's an old legacy language that's running because people are still using it and paying huge money for it. MS-DOS still runs some POS systems.

      You make a disjoint argument, as well: if something is so popular and powerful that it lasts 50 years, why would something else critically-important to large, super-rich clients simply fall out of maintenance?

      Finally, C# is current, it's well-known, it's easily-maintained, it has modern OOP which allows extensibility and flexibility in your architecture to reduce long-term risks. In the future, C# will probably not be a language--or maybe it will. We then cycle this around again when it becomes clear we may end up stuck with an event nobody can resolve, with the global banking system in tatters, with nobody able to spend money, and our best countermeasure is trying to get people invested in a dead-end career doing nothing exciting.

    2. Re:Staying power by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      COBOL hasn't lasted 50 years; it's an old legacy language that's running because people are still using it and paying huge money for it.

      But that's largely because it does relatively well in its domain.

      why would something else critically-important to large, super-rich clients simply fall out of maintenance?

      Even if something doesn't fall out of maintenance, it still may be difficult to find people versed in it. Like I said, a more general-purpose language would probably need lots of libraries to be competitive with COBOL, and those need learning and maintaining also. Learning COBOL is also learning the built-in keywords and idioms for handling its domain. With C# that would be a separate extra step.

  43. In the Year 2000...... by commodore64_love · · Score: 2

    Cobol programmers will be in high demand, in order to stop the Millenium Y2K bug

    In the year 2018... the problem is still not fixed.

    --
    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
  44. It's not about COBOL, it's about the ecosystem by crgrace · · Score: 3, Interesting

    When people are saying they need people to fill "COBOL jobs" they aren't actually looking for COBOL programmers. There are looking for people who are willing to jump into excruciatingly painful dead-end jobs dealing with obsolete technology and working just to keep something afloat.

    I had an internship with a Fortune 500 company (not a tech company) working on COBOL software in the late 1990s. The COBOL part was easy. It is a pretty simple (but verbose) language and doesn't take long to learn if you've seen FORTRAN, Ada, or BASIC. What *was* really hard was learning how the reporting and monitoring systems worked (we were basically gathering data from food production machines, reporting and archiving it).

    Basically, everything in this division was run on old IBM mainframes (actually new mainframes/minicomputers emulating old operating systems... MVS and AS/400 or something). You didn't have a command line where you did your compile and link stuff... oh no, you had to submit jobs in a very finicky format using the mainframe's JCL (job control language). It was heavily customized for no good reason (that I could tell) so only a few of the really acidic and unpleasant old-timers could help you get your stuff going. You couldn't look this stuff up on your own because it was basically macros built upon macros from I'm guessing the early 1970s.

    Anyway, this internship was soul destroying. Like the worst job I ever had. I worked my ass off and barely accomplished anything because the simplest thing was so hard and no one knew what the hell was going on. Every so often a "consultant" from HQ (we were a remote site in a different state from the headquarters) would come, install something, and then he (always a he) would leave while everything broke. Even though my internship was to develop a specific piece of new functionality, I spent most of my time figuring out what was going wrong and patching it.

    So technically, I have COBOL experience now, but really I have a bit of experience bashing my head against a custom one-of-a-kind wall, and that experience isn't transferable.

    To add insult to injury, it wasn't even a high-paying internship. The only good thing about this company was the culture was everyone was out the door at 4PM (hours were strictly 8AM to 4PM). Once I stayed to 6:30PM to fix a production server that was mangled by a messed up JCL card. (Oh god, the JCL cards. Of course they weren't punch cards because this was the 1990s, but you had to format the commands AS IF THEY WERE FREAKING PUNCH CARDS I guess because they were reusing old punch card parsing code. So, if you put a JCL mnemonic in the wrong column, the job failed. I wish I were making this up, I really do, but I'm not.) Anyway, I stayed till 6:30PM one night and the plant manager was so excited with my "can-do" attitude that he gave me a "golden nickel" which was one free lunch at the plant cafeteria. Yes, this was six months of my sorry life.

    1. Re:It's not about COBOL, it's about the ecosystem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I worked at IBM in the 1960's! JCL actually was physically on punched cards so if you dropped a card deck your lost many days of work.

    2. Re:It's not about COBOL, it's about the ecosystem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you did not put the sequence number on your JCL - you were an idiot and out of a job at the drop of a box. Literally.
      Dumbass.

  45. COBOL Talkers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Billions $$$ in transactions every day in COBOL code, & your ATM software is probably older than your home!

    1. Re: COBOL Talkers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not in the UK, unless the Victorians had ATMs.

    2. Re: COBOL Talkers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have being using Cobol since 1960 and i feel surprised about why the universities have neglected teaching a lenguaje used by so many strong users like banks insurance companies and federal government.

    3. Re: COBOL Talkers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I developed a simple Cobol Programming Generator in 1980.

    4. Re: COBOL Talkers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My Cobol program Generator is easy to use and generales Cobol programs using parameters. sixmorgo@gmail.com

  46. I have to laugh.. by bduncan · · Score: 1

    In the early nineties I was contracting for a large financial institution that were re-training COBOL programmers to be C programmers. I was called in to fix the most awful C code that I've ever seen, before or since. e.g. Functions that would span for 25 pages and blow up compilers.. Later of course, they needed all those COBOL programmers back for Y2K. Now they need 'em back for the boomers retiring. Such foresight.

    Here's a thought.. What about building a modern language preprocesser that spit out COBOL? Something like RATFOR did for Fortran?

    1. Re:I have to laugh.. by LordWabbit2 · · Score: 1

      It's called XGEN - ok, tried to find a link to it and came up with lots of other crap. It WAS called XGEN, and when I first started working as a programmer, we used that. It was a 4GL language that would generate COBOL code. I liked it, and was sad when they retired it and we ended up with all this generated COBOL code to maintain. Flags fucken everywhere, it was a mess for humans to maintain. So they tried to clean it up and replace it with more human readable / maintainable code, and that was better, but still a mess. So it was decided to rewrite the whole thing in non generated COBOL - written by programmers. So they hired a plane load of Indians and got them a long term place to stay, the project was supposed to last 2 years, by the first year they were six months behind. Politics had changed, the cost had just gone way up and the project was cancelled. So we still had to maintain the generated (and slightly cleaned) code base. We eventually just start rewriting sections to make it more readable, logged it to "Code Maintenance".

      The only issue I had with XGEN was sometimes you would miss a delimiter for an if or whatever, and it would give you a thousand COBOL errors when it tried to compile the XGEN to COBOL, trying to fucking find that missing delimiter was a pain in the ass.

      --
      There are three kinds of falsehood: the first is a 'fib,' the second is a downright lie, and the third is statistics.
    2. Re:I have to laugh.. by LordWabbit2 · · Score: 1

      Oh yeah, and the way it looped backwards was interesting to see in the COBOL generated, definitely not efficient, you used it with caution. But at the time to do it in COBOL would have been almost as bad, it was not designed for that (at the time). I think sometimes it's like looking at the queries the Entity Framework for MS creates when generating SQL queries, sometimes I just lean back and think "WTF is that?"

      --
      There are three kinds of falsehood: the first is a 'fib,' the second is a downright lie, and the third is statistics.
  47. Re:We should get all the nuclear shills on this si by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm pretty sure that you're not the stupidest person to ever post on Slashdot, but not I'm not 100% sure.

  48. I like spaghetti by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Keeps companies on their toes and jobs for future programmers.

  49. Fixed Point Math by KalvinB · · Score: 1

    Besides the hundreds of billions of lines of code that would need to be translated, COBOL does fixed point math exceptionally well which is why banks used it in the first place.

    If developers are serious about replacing COBOL, they need to focus on fixed point math and then figure out how to make a compelling financial case for using it. Change for the sake of change is not a reason to spend the money to change a language.

    https://medium.com/@bellmar/is...

    1. Re:Fixed Point Math by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even better in the risk vs benefit category, rewriting software for the chimera of reduced maintenance costs is hardly ever cost effective. By the way C# includes a decimal data type, almost as well suited for financial calculations as Cobol's decimal data type.

    2. Re:Fixed Point Math by Todd+Knarr · · Score: 1

      Part of why COBOL's so efficient at fixed-point math is that the hardware it runs on has fixed-point math instructions and the compiler uses them directly. The x86 instruction set doesn't include those (it has support for BCD math but the instructions are relegated to the "rarely used, don't bother optimizing" category and you have to keep track of the decimal point separately) and the available compilers don't generate code to use them so the math routines aren't very efficient. Frankly though I'd love to see fixed-point types as a compiler- and instruction-set-supported data type, I've written way too much code that had to deal with money that could've made use of them.

  50. Re: Do You Know Cobol? If So, There Might Be a Job by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    GO AWAY

    COME FROM

    best Intercal feature ever.

  51. The world makes money go around by presidenteloco · · Score: 1

    not the other way round. Never forget that.

    But "seriously", if you can code up a new altcoin in COBOL, I will be seriously impressed and not bored, admiring the sheer surrealist abstract impressionist audacity of it.

    --

    Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
  52. My first prof programmer job offer was for COBOL by hAckz0r · · Score: 1

    I tuned it down without any hesitation.

    I had been working at a company whos draconian monolith called Data Processing Department had no clue how to run a manufacturing plant. We had asked for 6 years to have a report for a fully expanded bill of materials (supposedly an impossible task) for our products so we could get a jump on the purchasing and inventory analysis of long lead items, and yet we were stuck with the hand entry on paper, whch was hand typed twice by data processing operators, which generated reams of paper,. That initial process fed the next level of hand entry on paper for all the subassemblies, which gave the next level of product, and at the end, we humans got out a calculator to total up what was needed to actually build something. To make matters worse, each run of that program was overnight and filled reams of paper we had to sift through, just to get a clue what we needed to complete the orders.

    One day I stayed late to play with my dual-floppy IBM 8088 PC 4.77 mhz with an interface board that let it act as a terminal to the mainframe. I had just bought a Pascal compiler and reprogrammed that interface board so to teach it how to pull up the interactive programs that displayed our parts catalogs, read the virtual screen data, and then to switched to the non-interactive mainframe partition where the same "report" jobs could be submitted through a virtual card deck, and then receive those paper reports as text data from those same programs". I now had access to all the information we needed to do our own fully nested bill of materials. The next day I sat down at lunch and threw together a recursive routine to do exactly that, and it submitted those batch jobs during the day and compiled the results from each job submission. This program cut an entire week from the time to deliver, and it took me half an afternoon to write. A week later I had that same program checking inventory and produced a consolidated list of what needed to be purchased.

    When my boss saw the output I created he grabbed my report and ran down to data processing to ask, no tell, them once again to write this 'impossible' report he now had in his hand. The data processing department took 6 man months to write that exact same report, and they had direct access to the database, and didn't have to reprogram any hardware, or write libraries, or to make the tail wag the dog. They just wrote straight COBOL

    In summary
    Pascal: 6 hours (once the libraries were written)
    COBOL: 6 man-months with no special development required
    You get to decide

  53. Re: India will do it by presidenteloco · · Score: 1

    Nice try but China is developing AI that translates COBOL to rust, while stealing one US penny per transaction and locking the penny away on a blockchain implemented on a distributed network of Huawei smartphones. Don't cha know.

    --

    Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
  54. Re:First? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm not sure if this is "whooooosh", explaining the joke, or pedantry.

  55. Re:First? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At least someone should defend Cobol:
    HTML has as much worthless clutter as Cobol. Languages heavily relying of parens and brackets like JavaScript are prone to obscure errors due to misplaced delimiters - not a Cobol problem.

  56. Updated offer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I just added the following to my website:

    Our offer:

    [ ... ]

    Legacy systems in COBOL, CICS etc.
    * Servicing, bugfixes and refactoring
    * Switchover to modern infrastructure

    We'll see what comes along...

  57. What could possibly go wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Training in India, south Africa, of course you want to send your financial information there. Wcpgw!

  58. Really makes me wonder by cshark · · Score: 1

    We live in an age where programmers are pretty used to transpiling. We have entire languages like Elixir and Scala that transpile to Erlang and Java respectively, and dozens of others. This has been going on for 20 years. We do it all the time. React, Typescript, and Angular couldn't exist without it.

    The way I see it, transpiling is the answer here. Doesn't even matter which way you do it.

    Say for example, you wanted to hire young cheap programmers to write code against legacy systems. Just come up with a transpiler that converts whatever it is they're working in into COBOL/DB2 that'll compile against those ancient IBM steel giants. It'll take work to get there, but you're writing non trivial in house code with it's own frameworks and coding standards anyway. If you're still using COBOL, complex projects are pretty commonplace.

    Or, if you're feeling enterprising, you could write something that will work against the existing code in your environment, and transpile yourself out of cobol completely, and into something a little more modern like Java, Go, or C. They've had the time, they certainly have the resources to do something like this. And if they did, they would be able to cut costs in the longer term, be more platform flexible than they are, and deliver a higher quality of product to their internal stakeholders, other employees, and customers.

    If they really cared about solving this problem, they would just do it. It wouldn't even be a conversation. It would happen, it would be done. No, this isn't really about COBOL or a shortage of old programmers who know COBOL. This is a pretense to bring in exploited offshore labor from the third world, in order to drive down rates in the labor market when the cost of living is at an all time high. "There's no solution, so we have no choice but to train offshore resources and bring them stateside to do it" is pure fucking transparent bullshit. And we should know better than to fall for it.

    --

    This signature has Super Cow Powers

  59. Here we got again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Once every year or two there is an article like this which talks about all the COBOL jobs. COBOL programmers are in demand, banks need them!

    Yet, I've only ever encountered one COBOL job advertised in the wild. It's all C/C++, Java, C#, JavaScript on all the job boards around here. Once, in 20 years have I seen a real COBOL job ad.

    Which is a shame, I like COBOL. Haven't done it in years (see previous statement about lack of COBOL jobs), but I'd be happy to dust off my COBOL hat and do it again, if there were ever any COBOL jobs in the area.

  60. Obligatory Old, Bad COBOL Joke by 14erCleaner · · Score: 1

    Did you hear there's now an object-oriented version of COBOL? It's called "ADD ONE TO COBOL GIVING COBOL".

    --
    Have you read my blog lately?
  61. We CAN train these workers here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Everyone should demand the H1B visa be abolished and really all immigration be stopped. I can gaurantee that if this is done that these companies would provide creative ways to find workers and would train American workers to do these jobs. We hear so much about how disadvantaged that group is or this group, we have massive welfare rolls that are mind boggling and inner cities are full of crime and unemployment, and instead we bring in cheap foreign labor instead of hiring and rehabilitating Americans. We need to fix our education system, use apprenticeships rather than expensive college to train for these jobs, which would eliminate poverty. Something tells me that a certain political party does not want to reduce poverty so therefore they bring in foreign aliens rather than hire americans, because they want to keep people on welfare in poverty for reliable welfare votes. All the while they tell these people the reason they cannot find work because of the evil "racist" american but while they help foreign aliens steal well paying jobs that could be theres.

    People need to stop kneeling during the national anthem and spitting on the flag and doing everything they can to drag down this country and instead make some positive use of themselves and stop being used as a tool by a certain political party that are ironically the ones who help foreign aliens steal their jobs.

    The fact is we have a great oversupply of tech workers in the US. They could find workers to fill these jobs and if they had any intelligence they would be training them so that the newcomers can be informed of the particulars by the old brass. The problem is corporations are unwilling to train workers or pay a decent salary and instead want to hire cheap foreign workers. The fact is this leads to declining salaries and high unemployment which is why it is so hard to get a job in programming. Corporations game the H1B system by demanding say, 20 years experience in CICS, Cobol, Easytreive, etc. We know that the fact is they could train americans and the fact is I have worked with CICS and Cobol and know for a fact we could train people for this work, trian Americans to do this work and get people off of the street. Why would the corporations however when they can get cheap foreign laborers who lie about their experience who dont have any experience with any of these things but just make up unverifable work histories in India of lies and the fact is the companies that hire them know they are lying through their teeth adn want them to lie because this way they can say these workers can do the jobs americans cant do. Its all a big scam and why do we put up with your own leaders basically screwing us over ? Instead you have dumb as a rock liberals demanding they be screwwed over who dont have jobs because the very polices of open borders they support have given all of their jobs for foreign aliens so they with idle hands do the devils work by becoming usleless commie miscreants on the street demanding socialism to pay off their student loans all the while demanding open borders for MORE cheap foreign workers to come in and steal their jobs. HOW DUMB A** STUPID CAN YOU BE.

  62. Re:Do You Know Cobol? If So, There Might Be a Job by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The problem with COBOL jobs is, you get pegged as legacy support. The job might last you the rest of your career, but then again it has to. If you spend more than a year there, you'll probably never get another IT programming job. No one else will hire you, except maybe another legacy shop.

    So your career depends upon the long-term intentions of your employer to stick with COBOL.

    I've been involved with a legacy platform. The thing is, the long-term trend is always down. Customers slowly migrate away from the legacy system and never towards it. I was able to transition to more modern systems but a former co-worker got caught on the wrong side of legacy. He had to go back to school and essentially re-train from scratch.

  63. COBOL is The Future by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 1

    COBOL is the future, of 1954.

    --
    Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
  64. Re:Gee... by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 2

    I haven't seen anyone offer a training, boot camp or workshop in COBOL.
    Because you did not look for it.

    Google: cobol workshop

    About 832,000 results (0.35 seconds)

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  65. Great Scott! What year is this?!?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1998 called, and it wants its article back, preferably before you outsource it to India and The Philippines. Quick Marty, set the co-ordinate to 1998 before it's too late!

  66. AWK versus OS2200 by emil · · Score: 1

    I must confess that many of my coworkers love the original UNIVAC operating system, OS2200, known in a previous life as EXEC 8.

    UNIVAC seemed to have gotten the ASCII message earlier than IBM, so EBCDIC isn't a problem.

    What is a problem is socket programming in COBOL - we had people who knew how to do it in EXEC 8, but they are gone.

    I have done obscene things with stunnel defending this beast. I'm actually an Oracle junkie in real life, but I am thankful for the COBOL cards that I wrote in high school and rubber-banded every class for understanding what the hell that machine is doing, and I don't understand 1% of it.

    But the best of these COBOL guys love the flexibility and expressiveness of AWK, and their descent into the C languages begins at this guidepost.

    Who says that you can't teach an old dog new tricks?

  67. No... by tigersha · · Score: 1

    But i know about toilet cleaning. Does this mean there is a job for me too? I would probably prefer it to COBOL

    --
    The dangers of excessive individualism are nothing compared to the oppressiveness of excessive collectivism
  68. Don't learn Cobol, let it die by Nocturrne · · Score: 1

    It's time to force them to update those crappy old systems.

    1. Re:Don't learn Cobol, let it die by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 1

      Hardware update is easy, and they do that. But they don't want to rewrite those millions of source code lines, as long as they run ; "we don't need an upgrade"

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
  69. Re:Do You Know Cobol? If So, There Might Be a Job by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yep, that would be COBOL. It says ELSE. In the first job.

  70. Working for a company that uses COBOL by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 1

    I wrote COBOL back in the day, moved to C++ ASAP. But it's not the language. A company that is still using COBOL also has entrenched, archaic ways of doing EVERYTHING. Sorry, not interested in the least!

    1. Re:Working for a company that uses COBOL by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 1

      A company that is still using COBOL also has entrenched, archaic ways of doing EVERYTHING

      They're called "banks".

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
  71. Specialisation has leverage. by Qbertino · · Score: 1

    If you're able to find the right customer/client. Specialisation is the reason I'm torn hither and fro on wether I should ditch PHP or dive deeper. There are setups out there that are not trivial and need someone who's way beyond regular web stuff.
    Same goes for Cobol. Anything running in Cobol today is bound to be seriously mission critical and thus non-trivial to maintain. Which means if you are able to handle such a set-up you're in a position to ask big bucks.

    There are quite a few jobs not doing the latest fad in technology and instead dealing with some obscure ERP system and its internal PL or something similar. Those systems aren't going away and are good places to find positions that are basically unfireable.

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
  72. Hard? No. Uncommon? No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why would my slaves in low paid third world countries not support me providing COBOL services?
    Bring it on I say. Just pay well enough for me to subcontract.

  73. Here we go again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh nice, it's the monthly "hey kiddos, did you know COBOL is still alive?" slashdot post.

  74. Re:Do You Know Cobol? If So, There Might Be a Job by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Spot on! All it's missing is a FAKE NEWS statement

  75. Re:Gee... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shouldn't you be ass fucking APK instead of posting here, or did he give up on you because smelly trucker dick was so much better?

  76. Re:I do & probably only 1 of a handful here wh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    By not working for anyone since 2007, APK means he got laid off during the great recession and hasn't been able to find an actual job since. By running his own business, he means he sucks trucker dick and gets his ass pumped full nightly at the glory hole in the Pilot Travel Center off of I81 that is within walking distance of his house.

  77. Yep. But would I do it for a living? by Pezbian · · Score: 1

    No. IDGAF what you're paying.

    --
    In a world of the blind, the one-eyed man is king--and the two-eyed man is a heretic.
  78. Wow, slashdot poster too k3wl by whitroth · · Score: 1

    Oh, yeah, all the k3wl tools in the latest language...

    Right. Perhaps most of you missed "it works just fine, and does the right thing" in the story. Explain why it should all be tossed, preferably without running in parallel for a year or so, and replaced with RubyOnRails, er, I mean, whatever Goggle's latest language is, or M$'s.... most of which will be forgotten in 10 years.

    Got a standards committee for your favorite language? (I've got one, but my fav's C).

    Oh, and about mainframes... how many VM's can you run on your system? Back around 2000, some nuts at IBM, using IBM's VM (which dates back to the seventies) maxed out a then-current mainframe... with 48,000 VMs running Linux, and the mainframe ran comfortably with 32k VMs.

    Would I go back to writing COBOL, Hell, no. because I like pointers, and more control structures. All the rest is excess... and before you try to argue that, why, wasn't that story on slashdot the other day, that the new versions of apps for the latest i-droid phones running *slower*, becuase what they're pushing out the door is crap alpha software?

    Let's see *your* software running 15 years from now. And do you *really* think financial services should be constantly rewriting software into new languages, becuase. they're new? So they can charge you more, because they're constantly hiring new develpers, rather than paying you more, or letting you learn a new language?

  79. Re:Do You Know Cobol? If So, There Might Be a Job by LordWabbit2 · · Score: 1

    makes small things sound important,

    If you think the daily calculation of interest for your savings account or home loan is "little" then you have no real understanding of the complexities involved.
    When I was still working for a bank one of my work colleagues was tasked with finding a 0.5 discrepancy in general ledger program. He eventually printed it out, it took a ream of paper, and he printed double sided and with as small a font as he could use and still read it. Granted, it was one of the larger programs in use, but still. You print out 99% of programs today (without supporting libraries) and it won't use up a ream of paper. That was his only work task for over a year, find the discrepancy and fix it. He printed it out so he could staple a dog's leash on it and drag it around behind him when he went for coffee. Eventually he hung a porcelain pig with feathers from the air vent in his office and stuck a half cent in it's mouth (not sure where he got the half cent - it's been out of circulation for ages) and told anyone who asked WTF that when pigs fly he will find the half cent. He broke over 3 keyboards by pounding the shit out of them, it was probably more, we stopped counting, but there were always little keyboard keys scattered around his office. Eventually he resigned and his manager / team lead took over the bug hunt, keep in mind that he wasn't the first person to attempt to find the bug. AFAIK they never found it, and each month they have to do a manual transaction to get the general ledger to balance. I worked there for almost 10 years, luckily by that time I had moved to front end, so the bug wasn't dropped on my desk.

    --
    There are three kinds of falsehood: the first is a 'fib,' the second is a downright lie, and the third is statistics.
  80. A few thoughts on COBOL... by erp_consultant · · Score: 1

    1) Programming in COBOL is not difficult. It is a very procedural language. It also takes a LOT of lines of code to actually do anything.
    2) COBOL is alive and well. In fact, on the ERP system that I work on there are many COBOL programs still around and they are crucial for Payroll processing. Nobody, and I mean nobody, wants to mess with these programs.
    3) COBOL, despite the fact that is is very old, is extremely good at moving around huge volumes of data. It is also very stable.
    4) If you are going to even attempt to modify a COBOL program you had better have a firm understanding of Copybooks and JCL, as the code is likely used in a lot of other programs.
    5) It's not going anywhere. The banks have no incentive to rewrite the code into a modern language. For one thing, it's incredibly complex to try and unravel. Secondly, you are not likely to get any discernible processing improvements. Thirdly, it would cost a fortune.
    6) Programming in COBOL is really boring. It is almost entirely back end processing. What doesn't kill you makes you stronger :-)
    7) As time goes on, skills in COBOL will command a very high hourly rate. Think government and banks. If you can stand all the politics and overhead you will be able to make a good living at it.

  81. H1B scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The fact is we have plenty of labor in the US for these sorts of things. The problem is corporations when they can get cheap foreign H1B labor of people with with faked credentials why would they pay for an american employee? What we should do is COMPLETELY abolish the H1B program. I gaurantee that if we abolish H1B these corporations will start apprenticeships and training programs to get all of the programmers that they need for these projects.

    People need to stop kneeling during football games and pissing on the flag people need to demand the H1B program be stopped. As much as we hear about inner city poverty etc etc why do we flood our job market with foreign labor instead of training our own population and rehabilitating them. It actually seems like a certain political party actually wants to import cheap labor so they can keep americans on welfare and thus reliable voters for said party. ABSOLUTELY PATHETIC and we pay the price for it as a country.

  82. Re:Do You Know Cobol? If So, There Might Be a Job by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought FOR/ELSE could be useful

  83. WoW - you're seriously disturbed &? apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    WoW - you're seriously disturbed & have "StRaNgE PhaNtAsiEs" (especially regarding me). My business has surprised me actually ("flowers that grow SO incredibly high" ala https://www.youtube.com/watch?... & same w/ wares I create, always...)

    APK

    P.S.=> You should stop projecting your inadequacies (especially onto me "newspapers taxis appear on the shore - waiting to take you away" (happens to me, not to you, lol))... apk

    1. Re:WoW - you're seriously disturbed &? apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      APK
      GO the fuck AWAY!

      (everybody!)

      APK
      GO the fuck AWAY!

      APK
      GO the fuck AWAY!

      APK
      GO the fuck AWAY!

      APK
      GO the fuck AWAY!

    2. Re:WoW - you're seriously disturbed &? apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By surprised him, APK means that he never thought he could enjoy so much trucker dick while getting paid.

  84. Re:First? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Error unknown token "CATION DIVISION" in Area A.

    Compilation fails.

  85. Re:My first prof programmer job offer was for COBO by LordWabbit2 · · Score: 1

    I would say your data processing department didn't consider your report a high priority and it got shifted down the list of other shit they had to work on. It probably only took a couple hours to write in COBOL, same as in Pascal, but they only GOT to it 6 months later.

    Change control can also be a pain in the ass (if they actually had any) where my wife works a small change means 3 weeks of waiting for change control approval.

    Their release schedule might be 6 months as well, where my sister works they only release twice a year, unless it's an emergency bug fix.

    Either that or they are a useless bunch of twats, the time taken has fuckall to do with the language it was written in.

    --
    There are three kinds of falsehood: the first is a 'fib,' the second is a downright lie, and the third is statistics.
  86. Re:My first prof programmer job offer was for COBO by hAckz0r · · Score: 1

    I would say your data processing department didn't consider your report a high priority

    That is an understatement if there ever was one. Somehow the production schedule, which is the only way you stay in business, should have been a higher priority than anything else, other than the sales reports. During my time of 6.5 years, there were six large layoffs. The company was bleeding money badly because of the inefficiencies of the corporate structure, and bitter fighting between departments grappling for power, and data processing was no different. The only group of people that were actually treated well all the time was the Sales team. The salespeople were the elite, and they could do no wrong.

    Change control can also be a pain in the ass (if they actually had any)

    Their change control was a COBOL comment block. They had so much dead code it's a wonder anything worked at all.

    Either that or they are a useless bunch of twats, the time taken has fuckall to do with the language it was written in.

    This. Exactly. Nobody knew how their system worked (or didn't), and to do the same report they needed to clean up the database of parts lists. There were recursively nested parts lists as well as broken/missing references, misspellings, all of which I had logic to detect and did workarounds. I had a couple of years experience working around those problems on paper, so I at least I understood how it needed to be coded logically.

    When I said 6 man-months I meant exactly that. That is the time that was actually charged to get it all done. They finally could not ignore all the problems they created for themselves, and they were thus forced to understand their own spaghetti code. As for the language itself, COBOL, in general, is extremely verbose. I could do in one line of Pascal what it took them more than a full page of their COBOL to do. Modularity was a completely an alien concept to them as well. I've read the code, been there, done that, because that is the only way to get them to fix the business and job tracking logic, and I would have gone insane if I had to deal with all that stupidity on a daily basis.