51–60 of 232 posts
Sometimes I wonder if I should learn COBOL just so maybe I can get my first real programming job. (and no, I am not joking...)
At least they will pay you well.
I'm doing this year's in UniVerse BASIC[0] which traces its roots back to Pick[1] which is only six years newer than COBOL, but manages to be less well-known.
Sometimes I wonder if I should learn COBOL just so maybe I can get my first real programming job. (and no, I am not joking...)
No, don't learn COBOL unless your dream job requires it. You absolutely shouldn't learn COBOL before knowing which job you're aiming for. COBOL isn't an interesting or particularly useful language to learn.
COBOL, Assembler, and FORTRAN are actually kind of cool.
Assembly language is kind of cool, though!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because I already know: C, C++, Obj-C, C#, Php, Lua, x86 ASM, ARM ASM, Linoleum (some ASM-like esoteric languagE), BASIC (not VB), Java, Python, JS, MushCODE (it is derived from LISP), SQL and some application specific scripting languages. I started coding when I was 8, I am 32 now, and in my government-issued employer list, I had zero employers. My dad knows COBOL and MUMPS, and kept talking about how horrible they…
If you're having trouble landing a job even though you know all those languages, COBOL won't be the magical solution. It's likely your problem lies elsewhere...
I do not get all the hatred. The idea behind COBOL’s syntax is the same as SQL’s: it is merely yet another “Structured English Query/Programming Language” designed, initially, for non-programmers to be able to describe in words what it is they would like to accomplish in a way they could be understood by the computer.
The hatred comes from people like me, who have worked with COBOL and will tell you it's terribly frustrating to work with, needlessly verbose in multiple places where it doesn't need to be, and often used in banks for purposes which are the death of all you hold dear or interesting to work with. COBOL is not an interesting programming language these days, and you should not learn it unless you need it for your curren…
Not to mention that verbosity often distracts from meaning, leading to more place for bugs to hide.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just curious, but why is COBOL the first language that you think about for this?
Because I already know: C, C++, Obj-C, C#, Php, Lua, x86 ASM, ARM ASM, Linoleum (some ASM-like esoteric languagE), BASIC (not VB), Java, Python, JS, MushCODE (it is derived from LISP), SQL and some application specific scripting languages. I started coding when I was 8, I am 32 now, and in my government-issued employer list, I had zero employers. My dad knows COBOL and MUMPS, and kept talking about how horrible they…
Not sure if this helps, but could also lead into working close/near with mainframes and COBOL.
I think I may have started a course in COBOL many years ago. Wonder if would be worth learning it now? There is a lot of COBOL code that needs to be maintained.
I do not get all the hatred. The idea behind COBOL’s syntax is the same as SQL’s: it is merely yet another “Structured English Query/Programming Language” designed, initially, for non-programmers to be able to describe in words what it is they would like to accomplish in a way they could be understood by the computer.
The hatred comes from people like me, who have worked with COBOL and will tell you it's terribly frustrating to work with, needlessly verbose in multiple places where it doesn't need to be, and often used in banks for purposes which are the death of all you hold dear or interesting to work with. COBOL is not an interesting programming language these days, and you should not learn it unless you need it for your curren…
But say this to non-programmers, and they vehemently deny it's true. And always cite a friend of their neighbor who made it good from COBOL. It's like they need to believe there's a shortcut out there to sure wealth as long as you're smart and work hard.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I suspect they are more suspicious of `pandas` than the syntax of the import. But, I'm also curious as to why.
Probably because it is indicative of a script written by a scientist, ignoring software engineering principles.