Re: Initialize

You can (still) download a copy of the 1985 standard for $18.00 from the
ANSI eStandards Store at www.ansi.org. The Intrinsic Function Amendment and
the Corrections Amendment are included in that price, and are also
downloadable independently at $18 per each.

You can also download the 2002 standard for the same price from the same
place.

>From www.ansi.org, click on 'eStandards Store', key in "COBOL" in Search,
then GO. Document "ANSI INCITS 23-1985 (R2001)" is the 1985 standard with
its amendments, and Document "INCITS /ISO/IEC 1989-2002" is the 2002
standard.

As far as individual vendor's reference manuals for COBOL, I can't answer
for any other companies, but the COBOL85 reference manuals for the Unisys
ClearPath Plus MCP-based systems are accessible without charge from
www.unisys.com.

The way I navigated from there to, say, the COBOL85 "basic implementation"
manual was:

go to www.unisys.com
click on "mainframes" under "products"
click on "Libra Series" under ClearPath Plus MCP Servers
click on "services and support"
click on "Unisys Support Online"
click on "Product Support" in the left column
click on "documentation" in "Access documentation to learn about ..."
type "86001518-307" in the "book number" field.

At this point a list of documents show up, in two categories: the manuals
themselves, and the documentation changes (D-notes) that will eventually be
applied to those manuals. You're interested in the former, entitled "COBOL
ANSI-85 Programming Reference Manual, Volume 1: Basic Implementation", in
the list. Any one of the several that show up will do, but the last one in
the list (#7) has all the most recent D-Notes summarized at the beginning.

If you need to go back that far, COBOL74 Volume 1 (yes, we still actively
support it, though we are no longer adding feature content to it) is "book
number" 86000296-203". Pick the last one on the list.

-Chuck Stevens

"rockocubs" <rphipps@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:b1fab2eb9ff8664fa71b5f655e037c25@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Thanks Chuck,
> I haven't saw a cobol manual in years. I wonder if there is a new one
> online somewhere. That way i could brush up have to take a Cobol test this
> week for an interview, never had to do this before.
>


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Program templates as Object Classes
    ... Here's the problem with OO COBOL - it is still very incomplete.. ... realized that OO was incomplete without support ... It's about two years ago a former, retired M/F Manager, (not Bill Klein ... Micro Focus above - but he was referring to the fact that Standard ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)
  • Re: cobol on pc
    ... LEAST since the '02 Standard was approved 5 years ago. ... I don't blame the vendors who walked. ... The only reason there is any kind of reasonable COBOL available today is ... IBM have a major legacy support committment that must not be eroded. ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)
  • Re: diff between cobol1 & cobol3
    ... (The LANGLVL compiler option impacted this). ... Standard via the CMPR2 compiler option. ... supported Enterprise COBOL, support the '85 Standard *plus* the Intrinsic ... The current (Enterprise COBOL) no longer supports the CMPR2 ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)
  • Re: Can Open COBOL do this...?
    ... NOTHING that is called or is a "97" Standard. ... I believe Fujitsu have a COBOL product called COBOL 97 (It later became ... Pete - cast your mind back to SoftwareSimple - At one stage I suggested, that the then J4 could arrive at a common set of Collection/Dictionary classes, (and with no info on Fujitsu - there were no on-line manuals at the time), both F/J and M/F could adapt their classes, using PRIVATE methods to feed into the common standard. ... When it comes to support utilities/classes, as you've indicated for C# - 4,000 or was that 40,000, the M/F Collections/Dictionaries are a FRACTION of the M/F support classes. ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)
  • Re: Discussions of COBOL philospphy
    ... It is a pity that the 2002 standard, which is actually trying to do some useful things with the language, has inherited this ... I wonder, was there a point when, had the COBOL community had the ... Suppose, there had been a release of the COBOL 90 standard, that included OO. ... Suppose a decent IDE and support tools had been available, that worked across platforms providing the same support in mainframe ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)