351–360 of 448 posts
Soon after Java was released, when the hype around the language was on fire, people used to say that it was going to replace COBOL - due to the "build once run everywhere" motto. Java indeed gained market share in the finance industry, but COBOL is still there.
You know, one of these days I really need to sit down and play with some of these "legacy" languages, like Fortran or COBOL or Ada or APL; languages that have certainly fallen out of popularity but are still used in some critical places. It does make me wonder about millions and millions of lines of Java out there; Java has more or less eaten the enterprise space (for better or worse), but is there any reason to thin…
Ada is an order of magnitude more modern and sophisticated than your other examples. I expect Ada will capture 0.05% of the market for the next 100 years.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> just like cyberpunk was realized without the vivid imagery and neon lights :( The 21st century never ceases to disappoint. It’s a cheap, low budget and dystopian version of what we imagined.
To be fair, what we imagined was dystopian, too. It's just that some people with a lot of ambition and not much media literacy didn't realize it was dystopian, and set about to build that future.
Oh, btw, COBOL has the 2038 problem and it is right around the corner. We're going to need A LOT of new COBOL engineers to fix it. It runs so much of our world. We managed to save the world from Y2K in the nick of time. But, I'm not sure if we're going to have the minds necessary to solve 2038 by then as the can has just been kicked down the road without consideration. If anyone is worried there won't be jobs, there…
Nah. We need to not transfer that knowledge, because the problem will be solved when the house is on fire.
But do not worry : nothing will happen until then. If those people cared, they would work to replace all that cruft, not enhance it to fix 2038.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Negativo friendo. The mainframe is turning into a middleware layer running on Enterprise Linux. We've containerized the mainframe at this point, and I mean that directly - eg. Running jcl, multiple CICS regions, all in COBOL that originated on z/OS is now running in k8s on amd64.
I hope you're right, but many comments here on HN suggest their experience with mainframes is very different. z/OS and its predecessors provided so many services completely transparently to the application that a mainframe to modernity migration is doomed to fail unless it can completely emulate (or design around) the capabilities provided by the OS and other subsystems. Even ignoring the needs of the super high end…
HN is not the place to seek authoritative experience with something like COBOL.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ada is an order of magnitude more modern and sophisticated than your other examples. I expect Ada will capture 0.05% of the market for the next 100 years.
Fair, I guess the list was “languages that I know were popular at one point but I don’t know anyone really using now”. Ada definitely does seem pretty cool from the little bit I have read about it. I’m not sure why it’s fallen by the wayside in favor of C and its derivatives.
This is much the same reason I'm highly skeptical of Rust as a replacement systems language to C. A multitude of very talented folk have been working on writing a second Rust compiler for years at this point. The simplicity and ease of bootstrapping C on any platform, without any special domain skills, was what made it absolutely killer. The LLVM promise of being easily ported just doesn't hold true. Making an LLVM backend is outrageously complicated in comparison to a rigid, non-optimizing C compiler, and it requires deep knowledge of how LLVM works in the first place.
I'll have you know I was approached for a FileMaker project not too long ago!
> such as fourth-generation programming language (4GL). If you’re not familiar with that term, suffice it to say that the Wikipedia page lists several examples, and Cobol has outlasted most of them. I'll have you know I was approached for a FileMaker project not too long ago!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I recall a spec doc from a domain expert that said something like: "The transaction consists of a credit stub and a debit stub. If the debit stub is missing and is of type X then we do A and if it is of type Y then we do B." How to know what flavour the missing item was? Absolutely no mention of that...
It's interesting that domain experts all exhibit the same cognitive issue - their assumptions are just so ingrained that they cannot articulate it at all. The fact that they "know" a missing stub would have a type is because they actually have some more information than they let on, and this information is only known by the expert. For example, they know if the submission was from party A, it must be type X. But that…
Or you give them a prototype of the program, and see what they complain about?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The problem is that the average person doesn't know how to explain & solve a problem in sufficient detail to get a working solution. I intuit this also is an intrinsic limit to LLM based approaches to "you don't need them expensive programmers no more" with LLMs magically "generating the solution" you move the responsibility for concise expression of the problem up the ladder. and then you "program" in prompts, rev…
There is a disconnect somewhere. When I read online, I hear about how GenAI/LLMs replace programmers and office workers. When I go to work, I mostly hear the question of how we can apply GenAI/LLMs, apart from discussion of the general buzz. Maybe this is a reflection of local conditions, I'm not sure, but it doesn't seem like the truly revolutionary changes require the solution to find a problem. It was immediately…
To elaborate: in the bad old days of you had one big engine, eg a steam engine, that was driving shafts and belts all around the factory. There was a lot of friction, and this was dangerous. So you had to carefully design your factory around these constraints. That's the era of multi-story factories: you used the third dimension to cram more workstations closer to your prime mover.
With electricity, even if you have to make your own, you just need cables and you can install small electric motors for every task on every workstation. Now your factory layout becomes a lot more flexible, and you can optimise for eg material flow through your factory and for cost. That's when factories becomes mostly sprawling one-story buildings.
I simplify, but figuring all of that out took time.