Re: Supress Option List


Thanks for that, Colin.

It was interesting and jogged my memory on a few things.

When I think about those days now, it is like another lifetime... :-)

Pete.

TOP POST nothing new below.

"Colin Campbell" <cmcampb@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:2_2dnWbl7o-TfZHeRVn-1w@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Pete,
> This is my memory / knowledge on the subject of IBM COBOL compilers:
> I started to work for Hughes Aircraft Co. in October, 1966. I was hired
> as an operator. After some months, I transferred to a programming group.
> This group had just begun to work on the IBM 360, perhaps a model 40 or
> 50. They didn't have anyone to train folks, so I was handed over to a
> "scientific" guy. He made sure I knew ForTran, then with another new
> hire, we started on the IBM. The "scientific" guy would learn something,
> then teach us. We learned Assembler, the Linkage Editor, and JCL. The
> "scientific" guy turned us over to our supervisors, saying we were
> trained.
>
> Well, of course, the first thing I learned was that all our programs were
> written in COBOL, so I had to learn that on my own. The compiler I used
> was COBOL(F), although I also worked with COBOL, ForTran, and assembler on
> the GE-635, which was brought in to replace the IBM 7094. That went on
> for about two years. In about 1970, there was a consolidation of
> programming groups at Hughes, and I moved to another site.
>
> Just at that time, ANS COBOL V2 came in, and I started to use that. The
> other programmers weren't aware of it yet, so suddenly, I became the
> trainer. Just as we got somewhat comfortable with ANS COBOL V2, in came
> V4. The name of these compiler signified that they were the first
> compilers IBM offered that conformed to the 1968 ANSI COBOL Standard.
>
> The second ANSI COBOL Standard was adopted in 1974, and led to the release
> of OS/VS COBOL. As Bill said, it offered 1968 and 1974 COBOL language
> support. In our shop(s), both LANGLVL(1) and (2) were used, right up
> until we forced everyone to adopt a new, supported compiler right around
> Y2K time.
>
> Between the mid-1970's and Y2K, IBM released multiple versions of OS/VS
> COBOL, then started with VS COBOL II. This was again a sort of "any type
> of COBOL you want" compiler, with support for 1974 and 1985 ANSI COBOL,
> and maybe even extensions allowing some 1968 syntax. VS COBOL II was
> pretty much a "new" compiler, not based on the technology of the earlier
> compilers. The basic code of VS COBOL II, as I understand it, continues
> today, through the COBOL/370, COBOL for MVS & VM, COBOL for OS/390 & VM,
> and COBOL for z/OS & OS/390 offerings.
>
> Our shop(s) pretty much became consolidated down to two development
> environments (from at one time, as many as eleven or maybe more), and the
> one in California moved everyone onto the latest COBOL, and kept moving
> forward as compilers were released, and the operating system was updated.
>
> I spent time in the late 1970's until the mid-1980's working with the man
> who had been the project leader for COBOL(F) at IBM. (We wrote COBOL
> compilers for a number of mini- and micro-computer companies, including
> MicroSoft.) The story I was told was that IBM had started three COBOL
> projects when S/360 came out - COBOL(D) for DOS, COBOL(E) for MFT, and
> COBOL(F) for MVT. My man was first to deliver by a good amount of time,
> and the three compilers were rather different in design and performance.
>
> I believe that the COBOL(F) code was the base used for the ANS COBOL and
> OS/VS COBOL compilers, but I am not positive of that. Tom Ross of IBM
> might know, but he's too young to have been there, I think.
> Colin Campbell
> =====
> Pete Dashwood wrote:
>
>> I remember the unbundling furore and I worked with IBM COBOL before it
>> happened. Unfortunately, I don't directly recall if it was COBOL(F),
>> although I have certainly heard the term used for one of the early COBOL
>> compilers. I remember the first ANSI COBOL compiler replacing what we
>> were then using, (it might have been COBOL(F) but I can't be sure) and I
>> remember discussing new features in the ANSI version with people at IBM
>> in Auckland. Here's what I remember on IBM COBOL Compilers:
>>(It is a long time ago and I was working on different platforms, so I
>>could be in error, but this is my recollection).
>>
>>1. The first one I used was COBOL 59 and it was running on a 360-30 under
>>TOS which replaced a 1401 in (or around) 1967.
>>2. The compiler was upgraded sometime a few years later around the time
>>of unbundling.
>>3. Everyone got very excited about COBOL 74 which I think was the first
>>ANSI release (?).
>>4. Somewhere in there, disks became available and the OS became DOS, then
>>later, DOS/VS. I have a feeling this also coincided with a new compiler
>>release but I can't be certain.
>>
>>Pete.
>>
>>TOP POST nothing new below.
>>
>>"William M. Klein" <wmklein@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>news:PQUOe.120084$576.107641@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>>>"IKFCBL00" was certainly what one "executed" for OS/VS COBOL (and I think
>>>for ANS COBOL Vx). However, COBOL(F) was a specific release (version) -
>>>very early - of IBM's COBOL. It was (as I recall) one of the early
>>>"bundled in" software products that caused the original "IBM decree"
>>>starting "unbundling" of software from O/S (and hardware). Again, this
>>>was all before my time, so I could be mistaken on all/some of it.
>>>
>>>--
>>>Bill Klein
>>>wmklein <at> ix.netcom.com
>>>"Rick Smith" <ricksmith@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>>news:11gnpfvpmma64fe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>
>>>>"William M. Klein" <wmklein@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>>>news:6xOOe.105532$576.81016@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>
>>>>>Do you SERIOUSLY mean the IBM "COBOL-F" version (that pre-dated their
>>>>>ANS
>>>>>
>>>>COBOL
>>>>
>>>>>product that predated their OS/VS COBOL), i.e. the compiler that
>>>>>(sort-of)
>>>>>
>>>>meet
>>>>
>>>>>the '68 Standard, but didn't even include support for the '74 Standard.
>>>>> ????
>>>>>
>>>>>Someone else may actually have a better view of exactly when/what
>>>>>
>>>>"COBOL-F"
>>>>
>>>>>(from IBM) was. I didn't start using COBOL(IBM COBOL) until OS/VS
>>>>>COBOL
>>>>>
>>>>was
>>>>
>>>>>available, in 1978 (or so - as I recall).
>>>>>
>>>>Bill, I think COBOL F was the same as ANS COBOL.
>>>>The manual I have, GC28-6396-5, IBM OS Full American
>>>>National Standard COBOL, shows, in the JCL for a sample
>>>>program, "EXEC PGM=IKFCBL00". This manual also has
>>>>the documentation for the first release of OS/VS COBOL
>>>>and the publication date on the amendment is May 15, 1974.
>>>>Only the standards X3.23-1968 and ISO/R 1989-1972 are
>>>>mentioned for both.
>>>>
>>>>While I said "I think", above, I never used the OS compiler
>>>>at the college; but I do have a source listing produced by a
>>>>DOS compiler I used at work. The title on the output is IBM
>>>>DOS AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARD COBOL
>>>>with the additional text CBF CL3-6, which I take to mean
>>>>COBOL F or ANS COBOL Version 3.
>>>>
>>>>
>



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Heres one problem
    ... When the IBM PC came out in 1982, I knew it WAS The One. ... MSDOS version 1 didn't support hard disks well. ... Cobol and Basic compilers, so there were always at least 4. ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)
  • Re: COBOL and XML (was Re: OT - "lie" vs "error")
    ... I cannot speak for all users of all COBOL compilers. ... that this is turning out to be the BIGGEST justification for several IBM ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)
  • Re: GOBACK (was: Perform Thru/Go to vs. Perform - Compile Speed
    ... >Yes, I dispute that. ... A search for "cobol and ... Can you make a case for 'right thinking' companies using other Cobol compilers? ... How odd it doesn't use the same 'front end' as other IBM compilers. ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)
  • Re: Supress Option List
    ... This group had just begun to work on the IBM 360, perhaps a model 40 or 50. ... Well, of course, the first thing I learned was that all our programs were written in COBOL, so I had to learn that on my own. ... The name of these compiler signified that they were the first compilers IBM offered that conformed to the 1968 ANSI COBOL Standard. ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)
  • Re: IBM S/390 memory model and COBOL
    ... I have been told that the earliest COBOL compilers created Assembler Language, rather than object code. ... the letter designations were intended to specify the minimum storage required to run the ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)