Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Micro web-framework for COBOL

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 66 posts

Re: Micro web-framework for COBOL

#31

Post by giardini »

marktangotango wrote: post #6

From the tutorial: >> the-values hold information about variables received. At the moment, these come from PATH (GET and POST are on the way). You can access them in the same order they occur in path. Well, this is kinda the crux of the situation isn't it? Query parameter parsing, and POST body parsing, can't do much without these. Is this to be implemented in cobol? I really hope not, parsing anything is quiet unten…

And COBOL uses fixed decimal math by default, an excellent feature for most business applications.

Re: Micro web-framework for COBOL

#32

Post by kpil »

krylon wrote: post #22

I once had the pleasure to meet a young person (~30 years old at the time) who had learned to program at a bank, so I had to ask her about COBOL. Her reply was interesting, if I looked at it as a general-purpose language like C++/C#/Java, then, yes, it sucks really hard. But if you look at COBOL as a DSL for building specific business applications, it does not look all that bad. Having never used COBOL beyond a simpl…

I don't buy the DSL argument, as it's not more suitable for any domain than any other language unless shuffling COBOL specific data structures from a DL/1 database counts as a domain.

Interestingly, Lisp is (slightly) older than COBOL and is actually truly living up to the DSL thing - at least nowadays.

Both languages are actually centered around data structures - kind of, but while COBOL is massively built on fixed structures and boilerplate, lisp is built around dynamic structures of lists (and pairs - or CONS) .

It's interesting that they were invented more or less at the same time, as COBOL feels as dated as anything can be, and Lisp feels rather ok. Scheme (a dialect) is more than 40 years old and is actually rather fun to program in, and feels modern in more or less every sense.

Re: Micro web-framework for COBOL

#33

Post by t1m »

mikestew wrote: post #28
t1m wrote: post #17

I remember showing my "systems analyst" brother-in-law my second year university schedule when I was planning which courses I would take that fall. "You don't have any Cobol, PL/1, OS360 Assembly Language or APL on here", he observed. "I am going to focus on C, Unix and operating systems. I want to write compilers for microprocessor based computers". When he finished laughing, he called me "unemployable" and said, "m…

And depending on when your brother-in-law made the statement, he stood just as much of a chance or greater of being right than you did. COBOL will always be around (those 80 billion lines of code don't maintain themselves), but microprocessor and PCs could have broken any number of ways. Granted, a good knowledge of C and Unix will go a long way and be applicable to whatever ends up "winning", but it was no guarantee…

My interests in C, compilers, small computers and Unix at the time wasn't driven by career aspirations. I was just genuinely interested those things. Maybe I was "unemployable".

Re: Micro web-framework for COBOL

#34

Post by t1m »

greenshackle2 wrote: post #25
t1m wrote: post #17

I remember showing my "systems analyst" brother-in-law my second year university schedule when I was planning which courses I would take that fall. "You don't have any Cobol, PL/1, OS360 Assembly Language or APL on here", he observed. "I am going to focus on C, Unix and operating systems. I want to write compilers for microprocessor based computers". When he finished laughing, he called me "unemployable" and said, "m…

There was once a programmer who wrote software for personal computers. "Look at how well off I am here," he said to a mainframe programmer who came to visit. "I have my own operating system and file storage device. I do not have to share my resources with anyone. The software is self-consistent and easy-to-use. Why do you not quit your present job and join me here?" The mainframe programmer then began to describe his…

The wise programmer is told about Tao and follows it. The average programmer is told about Tao and searches for it. The foolish programmer is told about Tao and laughs at it.

Re: Micro web-framework for COBOL

#36

Post by flukus »

protomyth wrote: post #26
t1m wrote: post #17

I remember showing my "systems analyst" brother-in-law my second year university schedule when I was planning which courses I would take that fall. "You don't have any Cobol, PL/1, OS360 Assembly Language or APL on here", he observed. "I am going to focus on C, Unix and operating systems. I want to write compilers for microprocessor based computers". When he finished laughing, he called me "unemployable" and said, "m…

In the late 80's, my academic advisor said he wouldn't sign off on me taking a COBOL class because that was a business department IT class and would not go with the rest of my studies[1]. I wasn't really into the idea anyway and filled my schedule with other classes. I do wonder what other CompSci departments at the time were doing. 1) EE was the sole teacher of FORTRAN and I decided against that also, more from a te…

Why the business department? Were they still under the illusion that COBOL would allow business types to write their own code?

Re: Micro web-framework for COBOL

#37

Post by mikestew »

t1m wrote: post #33
mikestew wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And depending on when your brother-in-law made the statement, he stood just as much of a chance or greater of being right than you did. COBOL will always be around (those 80 billion lines of code don't maintain themselves), but microprocessor and PCs could have broken any number of ways. Granted, a good knowledge of C and Unix will go a long way and be applicable to whatever ends up "winning", but it was no guarantee…

My interests in C, compilers, small computers and Unix at the time wasn't driven by career aspirations. I was just genuinely interested those things. Maybe I was "unemployable".

* I was just genuinely interested those things.*

Meh, I'm down with that. I would be a much richer man today had I chosen more wisely. But I would not be a happier man.

Maybe I was "unemployable".

Despite my comment to the (somewhat) contrary, as long as you're not specialist in BeOS or the like, in software you'll almost always make money doing what you like to do. Again, whatever ends up winning, the abstractions and concepts you pick up will generally prove useful where ever you end up. You might not be raking in the Benjamins like your SAP buddy over there pulling down $350K/year, but you'll be relatively wealthy and happy.

Re: Micro web-framework for COBOL

#38

Post by kazinator »

kpil wrote: post #32
krylon wrote: post #22

I once had the pleasure to meet a young person (~30 years old at the time) who had learned to program at a bank, so I had to ask her about COBOL. Her reply was interesting, if I looked at it as a general-purpose language like C++/C#/Java, then, yes, it sucks really hard. But if you look at COBOL as a DSL for building specific business applications, it does not look all that bad. Having never used COBOL beyond a simpl…

I don't buy the DSL argument, as it's not more suitable for any domain than any other language unless shuffling COBOL specific data structures from a DL/1 database counts as a domain. Interestingly, Lisp is (slightly) older than COBOL and is actually truly living up to the DSL thing - at least nowadays. Both languages are actually centered around data structures - kind of, but while COBOL is massively built on fixed…

Lisp source code is built around structures of lists built on cons pairs (and numbers, symbols, string literals, other kinds of literals, ...). (COBOL source code is just characters.)

Lisp data structures are varied. CLOS objects, multi-dimensional arrays, hash tables, strings, bit fields, ...

Re: Micro web-framework for COBOL

#40

Post by protomyth »

flukus wrote: post #36
protomyth wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the late 80's, my academic advisor said he wouldn't sign off on me taking a COBOL class because that was a business department IT class and would not go with the rest of my studies[1]. I wasn't really into the idea anyway and filled my schedule with other classes. I do wonder what other CompSci departments at the time were doing. 1) EE was the sole teacher of FORTRAN and I decided against that also, more from a te…

Why the business department? Were they still under the illusion that COBOL would allow business types to write their own code?

You know, I really didn't know then or now. The Business school taught COBOL and RPG on, I do believe, an AS/400 they owned separate from the rest of the computer infrastructure. I might be remembering wrong, but I was pretty sure that was the story[1]. I think it was something to do with the information systems degree requirements.

1) my Dad did IT on an AS/400, I still hear "wand in" instead of login.

[edit] looks like the new requirements are a bit more inline with today's world http://business.und.edu/undergraduate/school-of-entrepreneur...

Post reply on HN