Re: MAINFRAME SHOP STANDARDS
From: Chuck Stevens (charles.stevens_at_unisys.com)
Date: 12/13/04
- Next message: Chuck Stevens: "Re: OT: demise of COBOL WAS: Infinite Loops and Explicit Exits"
- Previous message: Robert Wagner: "Re: Cobol's hanging by a thread..."
- In reply to: Richard: "Re: MAINFRAME SHOP STANDARDS"
- Next in thread: Richard: "Re: MAINFRAME SHOP STANDARDS"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 13:35:06 -0800
"Richard" <riplin@Azonic.co.nz> wrote in message
news:1102475278.086314.244340@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Being in the current standard is irrelevant until compilers for that
> standard are generally available and have been moved into production
> use.
This might be regarded as heresy by some, but I'd argue that for a
*particular feature* it's not all that relevant whether compilers
implementing *all* of the standard containing the feature are generally
available; what's relevant is whether compilers implementing *that feature*
are generally available, whether those compilers conform to the rest of the
standard specifying the feature or not.
-Chuck Stevens
- Next message: Chuck Stevens: "Re: OT: demise of COBOL WAS: Infinite Loops and Explicit Exits"
- Previous message: Robert Wagner: "Re: Cobol's hanging by a thread..."
- In reply to: Richard: "Re: MAINFRAME SHOP STANDARDS"
- Next in thread: Richard: "Re: MAINFRAME SHOP STANDARDS"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|