Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<vb05om$162j5$2@dont-email.me> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: Article on new mainframe use Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2024 22:33:58 -0000 (UTC) Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 12 Message-ID: <vb05om$162j5$2@dont-email.me> References: <v9iqko$h7vd$1@dont-email.me> <vac17h$1ab6s$1@dont-email.me> <vad5h9$m9d$1@gal.iecc.com> <vamhds$3cplg$3@dont-email.me> <vaohtn$2o2h$1@gal.iecc.com> <vare5r$b7bo$12@dont-email.me> <5GkAO.84916$%Go3.29106@fx12.iad> <20240830183742.000065c5@yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Sun, 01 Sep 2024 00:33:58 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="451ad815162a3f3080e1cdc6c6433f29"; logging-data="1247845"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+sGmu13LPuxjU8ebgKRN1b" User-Agent: Pan/0.160 (Toresk; ) Cancel-Lock: sha1:osjtxE9LuIPhd2HfwFACByGEHqc= Bytes: 1705 On Fri, 30 Aug 2024 18:37:42 +0300, Michael S wrote: > It would not surprise me if COBOL compiler was implemented and tested on > 7080 then, while still on 7080, ported to emulated 705 and then sold to > users of real 705. As I recall, IBM wasn’t part of CODASYL, and had no part in COBOL development. So it had the usual “NIH” attitude and was trying to push PL/I as its all-singing, all-dancing language for both business and scientific use, for some time. Eventually, of course, customers forced it to relent and offer COBOL.