Watsonx: IBM's code assistant for turning COBOL into Java • Hacker News Board

Re: Watsonx: IBM's code assistant for turning COBOL into Java

#11

Post by welcome_dragon » Sun, Dec 03, 2023, 5:34 PM UTC

[flagged]

Re: Watsonx: IBM's code assistant for turning COBOL into Java

#12

Post by mperham » Sun, Dec 03, 2023, 5:37 PM UTC

We see this same article every year or so. Same song for 20+ years now.

Re: Watsonx: IBM's code assistant for turning COBOL into Java

#13

Post by mlhpdx » Sun, Dec 03, 2023, 5:38 PM UTC

I learned COBOL from curiosity (never using it professionally) in around 2010. It’s simple enough to read and use, but without having seen these legacy systems I don’t know what I don’t know.

This is just one of many examples of organizations squeezing an impressive but foolhardy lifespan out of some systems. Some CEO or another should have come to the conclusion (sooner) that they run a business, not a museum.

Re: Watsonx: IBM's code assistant for turning COBOL into Java

#14

Post by nobodyandproud » Sun, Dec 03, 2023, 5:38 PM UTC

tobyjsullivan wrote: post #8

tw04 wrote: post #4

Plenty of folks know COBOL - the problem is you need to entice someone YOUNG to learn it, which basically means overpaying them. If I'm an 18-year-old why would I focus on learning a programming language that puts me in a job with 0 chance of advancement? Sure I'm irreplaceable to the company, but I've also only got a handful of other places I could go if they treat me poorly or sunset their mainframe.

I’d be curious to know how we’re defining “overpaying” here. These companies have effectively accrued 50+ years of technical debt (they could have migrated off COBOL decades ago). Meanwhile, based on my limited experience with these industries, I’d be surprised if they even offer market rates to new hires.

Let me up the ante. Why do we believe COBOL is yech-debt?

Re: Watsonx: IBM's code assistant for turning COBOL into Java

#15

Post by kjs3 » Sun, Dec 03, 2023, 5:39 PM UTC

jalk wrote: post #5

There seems to be plenty of cobol transpilers - anybody know why they can’t use those. Immediate thought was it’s just beating on the dead Watson horse.

If they worked as effectively as they were touted, they'd have cleared out the cobol.

Re: Watsonx: IBM's code assistant for turning COBOL into Java

#16

Post by lucidguppy » Sun, Dec 03, 2023, 5:42 PM UTC

This is a management problem. Lack of long-term planning. People knew COBOL was "feature complete" DECADES ago.

"If it ain't broke - don't fix it." does not mean "don't maintain the things you own - just let them run until they break - then fix them."

Re: Watsonx: IBM's code assistant for turning COBOL into Java

#17

Post by datadrivenangel » Sun, Dec 03, 2023, 5:43 PM UTC

dun44 wrote: post #6

Regarding IBM's use of technology widely known for hallucinating to translate sensitive source code: it sounds weird you think the primary objective here is to deliver something that properly translates from one language to another. But it is not - the primary objective is to get money from customers and investors. Delivering something that works is secondary, and honestly, optional. Many things in IT start making a…

Especially for IBM! See IBM Watson for details.

Re: Watsonx: IBM's code assistant for turning COBOL into Java

#18

Post by mlhpdx » Sun, Dec 03, 2023, 5:44 PM UTC

discmonkey wrote: post #3

Classic misunderstanding of programming languages. The only thing stopping cobol from being "known" is these companies paying for it.

It’s more than that. If you spend a couple or more years learning to maintain those systems, where else will you work? Will you find a co-founder or investor for a COBOL based system when you go “entrepreneur”? Maybe, but it better be a damn strong niche.

Not moving forward with the software industry is a weird kind of conceit that separates these companies from the mainstream by far more than money.

Re: Watsonx: IBM's code assistant for turning COBOL into Java

#19

Post by kjs3 » Sun, Dec 03, 2023, 5:45 PM UTC

elteto wrote: post #9

These systems have not been running untouched for 60 years. Regulatory environments change almost constantly and the code has to be updated accordingly. I don’t personally know anyone writing COBOL but I’m certain there’s plenty of people doing it. And to change the code you have to know it. So there’s really no 60 year old code that no one knows anymore. Also, at this point, if you are running on a dead platform and…

I’ve been seeing these COBOL articles since the 2000s I believe.

Since the '80s for me. And certainly the '90s, since these sort of zero-content articles were very popular in the runup to Y2K: "the entire world is going to end because there are no Cobol programmers anywhere in the world! Everyone panic!". It's still bullshit.

Re: Watsonx: IBM's code assistant for turning COBOL into Java

#20

Post by kjs3 » Sun, Dec 03, 2023, 5:50 PM UTC

lucidguppy wrote: post #16

This is a management problem. Lack of long-term planning. People knew COBOL was "feature complete" DECADES ago. "If it ain't broke - don't fix it." does not mean "don't maintain the things you own - just let them run until they break - then fix them."

I hate to break this to you (large financial here, large COBOL installed base) but we're not just sitting around watching it run. We have hundreds of COBOL programmers, and they actually touch the code. I bet every day even. Crazy, right?

Just because some low-knowledge 'journalist' in a low-content rag decorates their ad-delivery with a low-effort 'you should have outrage about something' articles doesn't mean you should buy into it.