Path: ...!news.tomockey.net!news.samoylyk.net!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Rewriting SSA. Is This A Chance For GNU/Linux?
Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2025 16:04:07 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <vsk57n$239gm$5@dont-email.me>
References: <pan$54963$b3f3d4e6$ae35ff46$71fe05c9@linux.rocks>
 <gXCdnTD2YLRBaHX6nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@giganews.com>
 <m4tf1dFmvh3U1@mid.individual.net> <vsd0ui$365s0$1@dont-email.me>
 <JHudnUVvuNc823f6nZ2dnZfqnPWdnZ2d@giganews.com>
 <d41lujt571qvs8ksloa7q084fi7e7p7hnk@4ax.com> <vsgsgn$36mma$5@dont-email.me>
 <vsgtsq$3be4i$1@dont-email.me> <vsgvh2$36mma$8@dont-email.me>
 <Uf-cnVfuGfF4MnH6nZ2dnZfqnPGdnZ2d@giganews.com>
 <vsj46l$1jt3k$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2025 22:04:07 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="a5688444487e622995b2d3bc5e4d061e";
	logging-data="2205206"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18R6d8dBq9zNti9lTFJd2QWiw9JZaK8F+o="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:ktqQr2B/txzjhpJj6bQG1SsHCyQ=
In-Reply-To: <vsj46l$1jt3k$2@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 3490

On 4/2/25 06:40, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 02/04/2025 04:32, c186282 wrote:
>> On 4/1/25 11:08 AM, -hh wrote:
>>> On 4/1/25 10:40, Robert Heller wrote:
>>>> It should be noted that GnuCOBOL actually translates COBOL to C, and 
>>>> then
>>>> compiles the C code with GnuC.  In *theory* one could just run the 
>>>> whole code
>>>> base through GnuCOBOL and create a C code base, but good luck making 
>>>> much
>>>> sense of the generated C code...
>>>
>>> I had to listen to a PMP rant all weekend about how profoundly stupid 
>>> of a plan this is from DOGE, 
>>
>>    Musk's "plan" isn't bad ... per-se. As noted in a
>>    variety of news, some of those important federal
>>    agencies are STILL using 60s hardware & programming.
>>
>>    The TRICK is getting any newer stuff RIGHT before it
>>    goes mainline. That old COBOL code was GREAT, never
>>    diss those narrow-tie Dilberts from the day.
>>
> I think that people here mostly haven't been exposed to business coding 
> as much as technical coding.
> 
> There is nothing clever about business *coding*. The clever bit is the 
> business *analysis*, for which a very tight specification is written,
> 
> The problem today is that many people can code, but almost no one 
> designs the functionality any more. It's just 'thrown together'.

Good point.  This is effectively why my spouse's company had decided to 
stop hiring programmers and treating them their business (especially as 
COBOL became rare):  they inverted the script, to hire for people to 
learn the core business, and once they'd developed a competency there, 
they were asked if they wanted to learn programming (eg, COBOL).


>>    Anyway, eventually it'll be all AI code. We
>>    won't understand it - all magic thereafter.
>>
> It will all fuck up.

Indeed.  It is the 1990's "performance specification" but on steroids.


-hh