From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FROM,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 19546 invoked from network); 14 Jul 2023 02:15:28 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (2600:3c01:e000:146::1) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 14 Jul 2023 02:15:28 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EC8342A98; Fri, 14 Jul 2023 12:15:24 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-lj1-x22a.google.com (mail-lj1-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::22a]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 116DF42A97 for ; Fri, 14 Jul 2023 12:15:15 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-lj1-x22a.google.com with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-2b70404a5a0so21251191fa.2 for ; Thu, 13 Jul 2023 19:15:14 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1689300913; x=1691892913; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=1a1nppnCWeNswo/4lk4KqXjhtkyrBpIDLp+2fARefd8=; b=r43cm/seNzz+PzfHbVNPqTBKsSvrjwqCLb1FrVrAJKcpAUaAVKmUPWg1ugn9yuvp9e L8pKGFmRf7GxvIWFKwSidkIBweiwW1aeVmk4H78HIxPC+seJHOJYlariJfqkRXdYriSz lrgZWxZmfhXAOFKq6vV+w9p5g8xsVqZQjSHVyEVAERbqNb9RqF6HVGuFg2ThpDJAyorQ Bjkgvt9tLcpOWehfOq1TBzoiwC+Tp08JlwLtLgaXrLdPdR/EiOv2IBKH2IYkTEQKQ7mP GAJC52T9ROwk21BxpSctJ+MFEFrbaHZ/kMUg1SUGPuDLVe2FG7VK54rwyWB9p6f6Frq/ G0yw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1689300913; x=1691892913; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=1a1nppnCWeNswo/4lk4KqXjhtkyrBpIDLp+2fARefd8=; b=ONCVBjCexgaAnpLZCpsBv3wjiwbcxnMEEiDsWiuIPpTydiw0K9v5LNMiDirDE6t2Mn errSLZaI/6tJ75KtsJ1kV3ig7K85RydIpaZZiEEnhmM/CaUv6WYnwdTD26Ghj9y7iHaf DRd9uO/h2ZZmwc1TP2W5aqYajBFm2sTkSdKx5c5bf8JxnMUdoxTgzKG25x42lDLn5FaP iW9ZyJH3Wxv4pUvadoGnxOhDq5ajBWRmswBVD2BnOurtxyeIbOk9fcZNuELQy8EysTb8 3lvkO7tpZOq8Yz3PizGcJJn8QtIniUlyxic541nZ29ImfTPXyQBf/IQDV2ExvAQOZ1aW s5Ng== X-Gm-Message-State: ABy/qLZMjQ9CyRmrszbTq8tVaZbDLrldIdWQD/MzEddRWNAEKFKuGmHU XufreopfUeYNJRmUbgQ9SUMr/aBGEuVpgkJKsdcPUU3NlAA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APBJJlHn/NYNNWBVZqFxkGsT6vTQjwXmOcA13F/6zlCN+lvrcM67RT0MMPucnsi2fA9pbTEH0elfYngjoX2BYy0cqk8= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:880a:0:b0:2b6:e3e2:5045 with SMTP id x10-20020a2e880a000000b002b6e3e25045mr3515653ljh.18.1689300912643; Thu, 13 Jul 2023 19:15:12 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <0CCC47C3-950F-424B-AF6D-0F0DC08C53E5@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Dan Cross Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2023 22:14:36 -0400 Message-ID: To: segaloco Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID-Hash: NN4SKRRM2APNBK6STNSASPDLHRFIWND4 X-Message-ID-Hash: NN4SKRRM2APNBK6STNSASPDLHRFIWND4 X-MailFrom: crossd@gmail.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header CC: TUHS X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.6b1 Precedence: list Subject: [TUHS] Re: Bell COBOL Environment? List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Thu, Jul 13, 2023 at 6:36=E2=80=AFPM segaloco via TUHS w= rote: > The conclusion I'm coming to from what has been said thus far is that peo= ple who were moving from COBOL and the mainframe world to UNIX didn't have = as much of a need for COBOL. Since that transition often involved change i= n enough other aspects of an operation, moving to UNIX with the same COBOL = applications just wasn't the path to success for most folks, as opposed to = folks deeply invested in FORTRAN. Would that be a fair characterization? Echoing what others have said, that seems reasonable to me. Don't tell the mainframe infosec folks about this; they get really touchy about defending COBOL's honor for some reason I don't quite understand. > Thanks for the feedback by the way, one of the matters I'm trying to suss= out is what a typical COBOL environment on UNIX would've looked like back = when, and what it sounds like is a COBOL environment on UNIX was anything b= ut typical. A way to think about COBOL is that it's like a DSL for business transaction processing, but is itself a small part of the overall offering. In the mainframe world, it's often intimately tied to things like CICS, ISAM, VTAM and 3270 access methods, SNA, and so on, and in that sense the language itself is a rather small part of the ecosystem. Transferring everything into a new environment (e.g., on Unix) raises a lot of questions about the surrounding technologies and their non-availability, and ultimately just having the language by itself isn't terribly useful if you don't have all the other stuff as well. Also, COBOL is just a terrible language. - Dan C.