OT: Religion in CLC posts WAS: Re: MF Collection Class speed

From: Pete Dashwood (dashwood_at_enternet.co.nz)
Date: 02/25/05 

Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2005 02:51:25 +1300

"Robert Wagner" <spamblocker-robert@wagner.net> wrote in message
news:llss11dmekhmkg0lr8ne2bdl802f1su53c@4ax.com...
> On 23 Feb 2005 05:22:01 -0500, docdwarf@panix.com wrote:
>
> >In article <sern11d72igqfdnm3lth34sjgsgqrv4dm9@4ax.com>,
> >Robert Wagner <spamblocker-robert@wagner.net> wrote:
> >
> >[snip]
> >
> >>My question was rhetorical .. a nudge in the direction of reasoned
> >>discourse. I have no illusion CLC posters will see the light and
> >>emulate Max Weber's The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism.
> >
> >How interesting... in the first sentence, Mr Wagner, you say that you
> >nudge towards reasoned discourse and in the second question you use a
> >metaphor for religious revelation.
>
> Why does religion keep coming up in this programming forum? Is it
> possible that Cobol programmers see themselves as defenders of an
> intellectual lost cause?The last hangers-on of an idea whose time has
> passed.
>
> Just asking.
>
I reckon that's a very fair question.

COBOL was a powerful cult that ruled the world of EDP for at least 25 years
before it (COBOL) went into decline.

There are certainly parallels with religion in that.

It was arcane. It was administered by High Priests who kept the details
secret in the interests of job security, and held thinly veiled disdain for
people who needed their services.(Did you ever hear a COBOL programmer
saying good things about end users...? And yet these end users were the
reason for there being COBOL in the first place...)

There was no way to 'Heaven' (properly functioning computerised commercial
systems) except via the Priests. The absolute power was a corrupting
influence, just as it has been in certain other religions.

And just as there are devout Druids and Sun Worshippers today, so some of
the COBOL Priests cling to the ancient teachings.

The world has moved on. It got sick of being dictated to and held to ransom
by the technocrats. The world didn't learn COBOL; they simply invented
computers that could interact with people intuitively. The temple veil was
rent in twain and the ungodly stormed the synagogue. Bad news for the COBOL
priests. (Certainly for the ones who didn't see it coming, or, despite
repeated warnings to expand their skill sets, decided "everythng I want to
do, I can do in COBOL".) So they retreated to the mainframe fortresses and
tried to regroup, but it is over.

Nowadays EVERYONE is a programmer. (well, everyone under 25, anyway...). The
advent of the PC was like the advent of the printing press; people could
read it for themselves and "work out their own salvation with diligence".

And they are doing it.

They don't need the Priests of COBOL any more.

It isn't elegant or professional or slick for the most part, but
spreadsheets and databases work. People who don't even understand binary are
writing SQL queries against corporate databases and getting information to
support their daily decision making. Data flows across the corporation
without being locked into an antiquated, mysterious file system that
requires a programmer every time you want a report.

Business is moving back to running business; not hosting parasitic IT
departments that simply bleed the profit line. The days of virtually
unlimited budgets for an in-house IT department are almost over. They can
buy the service for a fraction of what it would cost to develop, or they can
distribute IT support to the people in the departments and let each profit
centre get what it can afford.

When you look at some of the threads in this forum you have to wonder: "Are
these folks actually getting pleasure out of this mind-numbing, brain-cell
destroying complexity...?" Why would I debate how to build a treeview to
the level of what windows API bit switches I need, when I have a COM
component that does it all, provided by my vendor? Instantiate it, set a
few properties, invoke a method or two, next problem...

It is because it is a religious thing. The devotion to detail must be
demonstrated. The true faith must be maintained. Only by pain can systems be
properly implemented, and shortcuts are sinful.

If it's easy, where's the satisfaction in that? For the same reason that
people in Italy purchase small whips to flagellate themselves, so do
programmers write low-level code. (OK, I accept that if you opt for a
MicroFocus environment, you may have no choice; their approach has always
been low level and they never were big on OO and components. This is not
intended to denigrate their excellent products. It is just an observation of
a different approach and philosophy. Net Express implements OO well, but
there is still only low level support for component building and wrapping.)

And you can see the same reaction here to anyone who questions dogma, as you
might see during a fervent religious festival.

I'm coming to a point now where I really can't see value in the procedural
approach. Certainly, I'm getting older, and certainly, I'm looking for easy
options, but when I can code:

<!--METADATA NAME="Microsoft ActiveX Data Objects 2.5 library"
TYPE="typelib" UUID="{00000205-0000-0010-8000-00AA006D2EA4}"-->
<% @LANGUAGE=JAVASCRIPT%>
<%
var currentMember = Request.QueryString("f1MemberID");
if(NaN(currentMember) {
// the MemberID entered by the user is not valid...
   Server.Transfer("BadMemberID.asp");
   Response.End;
}
//build a connection object
var objConn = Server.CreateObject("ADODB.Connection");
var strProvider="Driver={MySQL ODBC 3.51
Driver};Server=taurangawriters.org.nz;Database=twdbremote;uid=xxxxxxxx;pwd=x
xxxxxxx;option=3";
//Open the connection...
  try {
    objConn.Open(strProvider);
   }
  catch (er) {
  Server.Transfer("nodb.asp");
  Response.End();
  }
// we have a good db connection...
//update the password ...
    var reccount = 0;
 var parms = adCmdText | adExecuteNoRecords;
    strSQL = "UPDATE Client SET source = " + "'"+
Request.QueryString("f1newPassword") + "'" + " WHERE ClientID = " + "'" +
currentMember + "'" ;
    try {
      objConn.Execute(strSQL,reccount,parms);
        }
    catch (err) {
        Server.Transfer("procerror.asp");
        Response.End();
        }
// finished with DB, drop it...
objConn.Close;
// it's a valid login and password change, take him to the portal...
Server.Transfer("MAPortal.asp");
Response.End
%>

... instead of a couple of hundred COBOL lines, why wouldn't I? The above
connects to a database (that can be anywhere on Earth), gets user input,
checks it, updates the database, detects and handles errors that may arise,
cleans up and serves the user the appropriate web page if it is successful,
and took me around 40 minutes to write and debug. That is the ENTIRE
program, no ID, ENVIRONMENT, DATA, PROCEDURE or any other kind of wrapping
required.

It can do this because it uses the underlying power of ActiveX components,
which, in turn, derive their power from OO programming, which most people
here regard with suspicion and distaste. Almost all of the variables above
are objects with built in methods and properties that I don't have to even
think about; I can just use them. If I have a Server object and I want it to
switch from the current document and serve up something different, why would
I write:

(and this is modern OO COBOL...)
invoke Server "new"
           using "someExotic.dll"
           returning objServer
end-invoke
invoke objServer "Transfer"
           using "MAPortal.asp"
end-invoke

...when I can write: Server.Transfer("MAPortal.asp");

(It is a base ASP object so it instantiates itself if it hasn't already...)

The new religion is Object Oriented and Component based, and even these are
being abstracted (as in the line above) so that detailed knowledge is not
required.

The future of COBOL is in batch. It is good for that. You don't need objects
for batch processing although dedicated devotees of OO would contrive to use
them, just to show their strong adherence to the faith...

I believe Robert may have a point; perhaps the same factors that contribute
to religious bigotry, are also found to a large extent in COBOL programmers.
Or SOME COBOL programmers? Or SOME COBOL Programmers who frequent CLC? (I
don't exclude myself from this group...)

Or then again, maybe religious topics get discussed here because they're
normally taboo and this is therefore one of the last places on the planet
where you CAN discuss them.

Either way, the off topic posts here are invariably more interesting than
the on-topic ones.

At least, they are to those of us who are not religious... <G>

Pete.