Re: The Life Cycle of Technology and COBOL
- From: Howard Brazee <howard@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 11:55:22 -0600
On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 11:47:27 +1200, "Pete Dashwood"
<dashwood@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hmmm... I think there is a very wrong implication in your last three
sentences, Charles. (Rest of the post was interesting and seems fairly
reasonable.)
The "rest of the world" has not moved to OO technologies because they
perceived a lack of support for COBOL or because no-one implemented the
latest standard.
OO is not an alternative to COBOL; it is a DIFFERENT paradigm. If COBOL
never existed, a strong case can still be made that the World would move to
OO technology; if COBOL HAD everything in the last standard, the World woud
still move to OO technologies, and would probably not use COBOL.
It could be like comparing CDs with vinyl records - in the era of
iTunes downloads.
Cars replaced horses - but horses are still around. But they are no
longer a significant part of our transportation system.
Or maybe CoBOL is classical music...
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: The Life Cycle of Technology and COBOL
- From: Pete Dashwood
- Re: The Life Cycle of Technology and COBOL
- References:
- The Life Cycle of Technology and COBOL
- From: Charles Hottel
- Re: The Life Cycle of Technology and COBOL
- From: Pete Dashwood
- The Life Cycle of Technology and COBOL
- Prev by Date: Re: The Future
- Next by Date: Re: The Life Cycle of Technology and COBOL
- Previous by thread: Re: The Life Cycle of Technology and COBOL
- Next by thread: Re: The Life Cycle of Technology and COBOL
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|