OO-COBOL for Unisys IX (was: If you were inventing CoBOL...)

From: Lko Willms (lw-nospam_at_t-online.de)
Date: 09/21/04 

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 05:27:49 +0200 (MES)

On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 17:00:54 -0500, LX-i wrote:

>>> Unisys
>>> offers a OO-COBOL for their other mainframe line, the "Clearpath IX" aka
>>> Univac OS/1100. It is on release level 2R1. ...
>>
>Our biggest problem is that our configuration management system has been
>scripted (with ECL and whatnot) to automate a mainframe compile from a
>web page. The PC-based preprocessor hasn't shown enough benefit yet for
> us to try to script that, then send the intermediate results up to the
>mainframe to let UCOB and LINK finish them off.

   This is a misunderstanding. OO-COBOL is not a preprocessor for UCOB. At
least according to the manuals, you could use OO-COBOL _instead_ of UCOB, and
providing all the extensions like Embedded SQL, DMS access, and IBM Tape
processing.

    The PC produces intermediate code which is sent to the host and is
processed there by @OCOB, with an O, not by @UCOB. @OCOB produces an Omnibus
which could be directly @XQTed or @LINKed.

    The transfer of this intermediate code from the NT-workstation to the
host is done automatically by the workstation program.

> It would take a big
>change in policy to let it work. That's why I'd LOVE for Unisys to port
>some OO COBOL to the mainframe compiler, even if it's still a
>preprocessor for UCOB.

   Probably the compiler licenced from Hitachi is to much tied into WinNT
that it can easily be ported to OS/1100.

   Also, I think that a workstation based editor can be more productive --
OO-COBOL comes with a COBOL editor with syntax highlighting, and I doubt that
this can be done as effectively with @IPF. See Vol. 4 of the OO-COBOL manuals
(publication number 7851 5855-001).

Yours,
L. Willms
------------------------------ all rights reserved ------------------------