comp.lang.cobol

• Thread Index

---

• Re: "Free" workbench/IDE
  • From: William M. Klein
• Re: OT: Baby Update (final)
  • From: Charles Hottel
• Re: "Free" workbench/IDE
  • From: Alistair
• Re: "Free" workbench/IDE
  • From: Alistair
• Re: How to find the greatest of two numbers without using the comparison operators?
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: How to find the greatest of two numbers without using thecomparison operators?
  • From: William M. Klein
• Re: How to find the greatest of two numbers without using the comparison operators?
  • From:
• Re: How to find the greatest of two numbers without using the comparison operators?
  • From: SkippyPB
• Re: How to find the greatest of two numbers without using the comparison operators?
  • From: SkippyPB
• Re: OT: Baby Update (final)
  • From: SkippyPB
• Re: How to find the greatest of two numbers without using the comparison operators?
  • From: William M. Klein
• Re: How to find the greatest of two numbers without using thecomparison operators?
  • From: Rick Smith
• Re: How to find the greatest of two numbers without using the comparison operators?
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: OT: Baby Update (final)
  • From: Charles Hottel
• Re: OT: Baby Update (final)
  • From: Charles Hottel
• Re: Baby Update (final)
  • From: Charles Hottel
• Re: How to find the greatest of two numbers without using the comparison operators?
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: How to find the greatest of two numbers without using the comparison operators?
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: How to find the greatest of two numbers without using the comparison operators?
  • From: Michael Mattias
• Re: How to find the greatest of two numbers without using the comparison operators?
  • From: Aparajita
• Re: OT: Baby Update (final)
  • From: Doug Miller
• Re: How to find the greatest of two numbers without using the comparison operators?
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: How to find the greatest of two numbers without using the comparison operators?
  • From:
• How to find the greatest of two numbers without using the comparison operators?
  • From: Aparajita
• Re: SAME AS ('02 Standard) Clause - and circulatiy
  • From: Rick Smith
• Re: SAME AS ('02 Standard) Clause - and circulatiy
  • From: William M. Klein
• Re: SAME AS ('02 Standard) Clause - and circulatiy
  • From: Rick Smith
• Re: SAME AS ('02 Standard) Clause - and circulatiy
  • From: William M. Klein
• Re: OT: Baby Update (final)
  • From:
• Re: Baby Update (final)
  • From: Robert Jones
• Re: Baby Update (final)
  • From: Charles Hottel
• OT: Baby Update (final)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: SAME AS ('02 Standard) Clause - and circulatiy
  • From: Rick Smith
• Re: SAME AS ('02 Standard) Clause - and circulatiy
  • From: William M. Klein
• Re: "Free" workbench/IDE
  • From: MikeB
• Re: Problems compiling Micro Focus COBOL program as GNT
  • From: Simon Tobias
• Re: SAME AS ('02 Standard) Clause - and circulatiy
  • From: Rick Smith
• Re: Compiling forward references
  • From: Rick Smith
• Re: CONSTANT ENTRY (was "forward" references (was: COBOL subscript range checking))
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Compiling forward references
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Compiling forward references
  • From: Robert
• Re: SAME AS ('02 Standard) Clause - and circulatiy
  • From: Rick Smith
• Re: SAME AS ('02 Standard) Clause - and circulatiy
  • From: Rick Smith
• Re: SAME AS ('02 Standard) Clause - and circulatiy
  • From: William M. Klein
• Re: CONSTANT ENTRY (was "forward" references (was: COBOL subscript range checking))
  • From: Rick Smith
• Re: SAME AS ('02 Standard) Clause - and circulatiy
  • From: Rick Smith
• Re: SAME AS ('02 Standard) Clause - and circulatiy
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: SAME AS ('02 Standard) Clause - and circulatiy
  • From: William M. Klein
• Re: CONSTANT ENTRY (was "forward" references (was: COBOL subscript range checking))
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• SAME AS ('02 Standard) Clause - and circulatiy
  • From: William M. Klein
• Re: CONSTANT ENTRY (was "forward" references (was: COBOL subscript range checking))
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Basement tinkerers and inventors
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: "Free" workbench/IDE
  • From: William M. Klein
• "Free" workbench/IDE
  • From: MikeB
• Re: CONSTANT ENTRY (was "forward" references (was: COBOL subscript range checking))
  • From: William M. Klein
• Basement tinkerers and inventors
  • From: Graham Hobbs
• Re: CONSTANT ENTRY (was "forward" references (was: COBOL subscript range checking))
  • From: Rick Smith
• Re: CONSTANT ENTRY (was "forward" references (was: COBOL subscript range checking))
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Problems compiling Micro Focus COBOL program as GNT
  • From: sturk_25
• Re: CONSTANT ENTRY (was "forward" references (was: COBOL subscript range checking))
  • From: Karl Kiesel
• Re: OT: Baby Update
  • From: Paul Raulerson
• Re: CONSTANT ENTRY (was "forward" references (was: COBOL subscript range checking))
  • From: William M. Klein
• Re: CONSTANT ENTRY (was "forward" references (was: COBOL subscript range checking))
  • From: William M. Klein
• Re: CONSTANT ENTRY (was "forward" references (was: COBOL subscript range checking))
  • From: William M. Klein
• Re: CONSTANT ENTRY (was "forward" references (was: COBOL subscript range checking))
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: CONSTANT ENTRY (was "forward" references (was: COBOL subscript range checking))
  • From: Roger While
• Re: CONSTANT ENTRY (was "forward" references (was: COBOL subscript range checking))
  • From: Karl Kiesel
• Re: "forward" references (was: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: William M. Klein
• Re: "forward" references (was: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: Rick Smith
• Re: "forward" references (was: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: William M. Klein
• "forward" references (was: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: William M. Klein
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: Bitmaps
  • From: tleaders...gmail.com
• Re: "forward" references (was: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: Karl Kiesel
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: Roger While
• "forward" references (was: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: William M. Klein
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: Rick Smith
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: William M. Klein
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: Rick Smith
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: Alistair
• Re: STICKY LINKAGE
  • From: Roger While
• Re: The pre-interview question...
  • From: Alistair
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: Rick Smith
• Re: STICKY LINKAGE
  • From: William M. Klein
• Re: STICKY LINKAGE
  • From: William M. Klein
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: William M. Klein
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: STICKY LINKAGE
  • From: Robert
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From:
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: The pre-interview question...
  • From: Michael Mattias
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: The pre-interview question...
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: The pre-interview question...
  • From: HeyBub
• Re: The pre-interview question...
  • From:
• Re: COBOL Programmers Wanted in Columbia. Missouri
  • From:
• Re: The pre-interview question...
  • From: klshafer@xxxxxxx
• Re: The pre-interview question...
  • From: Michael Mattias
• Re: COBOL Programmers Wanted in Columbia. Missouri
  • From: SkippyPB
• Re: evaluate false, again
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: The pre-interview question...
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: The pre-interview question...
  • From: LX-i
• Re: The pre-interview question...
  • From:
• Re: The pre-interview question...
  • From: Michael Mattias
• Re: The pre-interview question...
  • From:
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From:
• Re: The pre-interview question...
  • From: Michael Mattias
• OT: Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Roger While
• Re: The pre-interview question...
  • From: Alistair
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: STICKY LINKAGE
  • From: Roger While
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From:
• Re: STICKY LINKAGE
  • From: Robert
• Re: The pre-interview question...
  • From: Robert
• Re: Bitmaps
  • From: Richard
• Re: evaluate false, again
  • From: Richard
• Re: evaluate false, again
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: The pre-interview question...
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: COBOL Programmers Wanted in Columbia. Missouri
  • From:
• Re: COBOL Programmers Wanted in Columbia. Missouri
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• COBOL Programmers Wanted in Columbia. Missouri
  • From: jobman
• Re: STICKY LINKAGE
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: STICKY LINKAGE
  • From: Roger While
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: STICKY LINKAGE
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: evaluate false, again
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: Bitmaps
  • From: jmoore207
• Re: The pre-interview question...
  • From: LX-i
• The pre-interview question...
  • From: HeyBub
• Re: evaluate false, again
  • From: Michael Mattias
• Re: STICKY LINKAGE
  • From: Sergey Kashyrin
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: Rick Smith
• Re: evaluate false, again
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: evaluate false, again
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From:
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Doug Miller
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: evaluate false, again
  • From: William M. Klein
• Re: evaluate false, again
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: So here he goes again!
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: STICKY LINKAGE
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: So here he goes again!
  • From: William M. Klein
• Re: evaluate false, again
  • From: William M. Klein
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: klshafer@xxxxxxx
• Re: STICKY LINKAGE
  • From: William M. Klein
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Bitmaps
  • From: jmoore207
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: klshafer@xxxxxxx
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Doug Miller
• Re: STICKY LINKAGE
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Doug Miller
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Doug Miller
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Doug Miller
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: John Reagan
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: John Reagan
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: HeyBub
• Re: STICKY LINKAGE
  • From: Michael Mattias
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Doug Miller
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From:
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Arnold Trembley
• Re: STICKY LINKAGE
  • From: William M. Klein
• Re: How to send a Fax from Powercobol application ?
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: William M. Klein
• Re: Powercobol slow on Intel Core duo
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Powercobol slow on Intel Core duo
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Richard
• Re: Powercobol slow on Intel Core duo
  • From: Richard
• Re: How to send a Fax from Powercobol application ?
  • From: HeyBub
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: klshafer@xxxxxxx
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: klshafer@xxxxxxx
• Re: Powercobol slow on Intel Core duo
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Urgent!!! Tandem-Base 24 Professionals for UAE
  • From:
• How to send a Fax from Powercobol application ?
  • From: Massimo
• Powercobol slow on Intel Core duo
  • From: Massimo
• Urgent!!! Tandem-Base 24 Professionals for UAE
  • From: vam
• Re: MI5 Persecution: I am being ignored 17/4/97 (12474)
  • From: tlmfru
• Re: MI5 Persecution: I am being ignored 17/4/97 (12474)
  • From:
• Re: MI5 Persecution: I am being ignored 17/4/97 (12474)
  • From: LX-i
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: LX-i
• OT: ooRexx article and Mono atricle
  • From: Charles Hottel
• Re: MI5 Persecution: I am being ignored 17/4/97 (12474)
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: MI5 Persecution: I am being ignored 17/4/97 (12474)
  • From:
• Re: MI5 Persecution: I am being ignored 17/4/97 (12474)
  • From: tlmfru
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: HeyBub
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: John Reagan
• COPY code in procedure division was Re: Stop Run vs GoBack
  • From: Clark F Morris
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From:
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From:
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: LX-i
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: LX-i
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: LX-i
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Alistair
• Re: What's Hot?
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• What's Hot?
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: HeyBub
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: HeyBub
• Re: Odd initializing code
  • From: HeyBub
• Re: STICKY LINKAGE
  • From: HeyBub
• Re: STICKY LINKAGE
  • From: me
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Charles Hottel
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From:
• Re: STICKY LINKAGE
  • From: Alistair
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: STICKY LINKAGE
  • From: Sergey Kashyrin
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From:
• Re: STICKY LINKAGE
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: klshafer@xxxxxxx
• STICKY LINKAGE
  • From: Roger While
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From:
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: Urgent need for Cobol Developer
  • From:
• Re: Urgent need for Cobol Developer
  • From: Alistair
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From:
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: LX-i
• Re: Odd initializing code
  • From: LX-i
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: LX-i
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: LX-i
• Re: Odd initializing code
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Odd initializing code
  • From: HeyBub
• Re: Odd initializing code
  • From: Michael Mattias
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Richard
• Re: Odd initializing code
  • From: HeyBub
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Judson McClendon
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: HeyBub
• Odd initializing code
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: Browser standards was Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Alistair
• Urgent need for Cobol Developer
  • From: Sunny
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: klshafer@xxxxxxx
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Doug Miller
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From:
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Doug Miller
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Browser standards was Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Clark F Morris
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: klshafer@xxxxxxx
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: John Reagan
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Alistair
• Re: So here he goes again!
  • From: Alistair
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Clark F Morris
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From:
• Mainframe Online Exam / Certification
  • From: Mainframe Group
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: LX-i
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: LX-i
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: LX-i
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: LX-i
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: LX-i
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Richard
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From:
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From:
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: klshafer@xxxxxxx
• Re: evaluate false, again
  • From: Doug Miller
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: evaluate false, again
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• So here he goes again!
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: me
• Re: Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: Alistair
• Re: evaluate false, again
  • From: HeyBub
• Regarding EVALUATE TRUE
  • From: klshafer@xxxxxxx
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Richard
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: evaluate false, again
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: evaluate false, again
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: VisualAge COBOL (was: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: evaluate false, again
  • From:
• Re: evaluate false, again
  • From: SkippyPB
• Re: evaluate false, again
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: evaluate false, again
  • From: Doug Miller
• Re: evaluate false, again
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: evaluate false, again
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: evaluate false, again
  • From: Alistair
• Re: evaluate false, again
  • From:
• Re: evaluate false, again
  • From: Richard
• Re: evaluate false, again
  • From: Richard
• Re: evaluate false, again
  • From: LX-i
• Re: VisualAge COBOL (was: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question
  • From: Richard
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: LX-i
• Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question
  • From: LX-i
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Clark F Morris
• Re: evaluate false, again
  • From:
• Re: evaluate false, again
  • From: HeyBub
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: evaluate false, again
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: evaluate false, again
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: evaluate false, again
  • From: Alistair
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: evaluate false, again
  • From: Doug Miller
• evaluate false, again
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From:
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: Clark F Morris
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Binyamin Dissen
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: HeyBub
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: Rick Smith
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Michael Mattias
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: LX-i
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: William M. Klein
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: William M. Klein
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From:
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: Rick Smith
• Re: VisualAge COBOL (was: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: OT: Baby Update
  • From: Charles Hottel
• Re: field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Clark F Morris
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: William M. Klein
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: Rick Smith
• Re: Actual COBOL in Commodore 64
  • From: Alistair
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• field validation (was Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question)
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: Rick Smith
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: OT: Baby Update
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: OT: Baby Update
  • From: Charles Hottel
• Re: Actual COBOL in Commodore 64
  • From: SkippyPB
• Re: Actual COBOL in Commodore 64
  • From: Robin Lee
• Re: Actual COBOL in Commodore 64
  • From: Alistair
• Re: VisualAge COBOL (was: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• VisualAge COBOL (was: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question
  • From: William M. Klein
• Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question
  • From: Rick Smith
• Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question
  • From: LX-i
• Re: Actual COBOL in Commodore 64
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: OT: Baby Update
  • From: LX-i
• Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question
  • From: LX-i
• Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question
  • From: Graham Hobbs
• Re: Actual COBOL in Commodore 64
  • From: Richard Brady
• Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question
  • From: Michael Mattias
• Re: Baby Update
  • From: Charles Hottel
• Re: Baby Update
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question
  • From: Graham Hobbs
• Re: Baby Update
  • From: Charles Hottel
• Re: Baby Update
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Baby Update
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: William M. Klein
• Re: OT: Baby Update
  • From: Charles Hottel
• Re: OT: Baby Update
  • From: Charles Hottel
• Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question
  • From: Robert Jones
• Re: COBOL/DB2 Date edit question
  • From: Michael Mattias
• COBOL/DB2 Date edit question
  • From: Graham Hobbs
• Re: OT: Baby Update
  • From: SkippyPB
• Re: Actual COBOL in Commodore 64
  • From: SkippyPB
• Re: Actual COBOL in Commodore 64
  • From: SkippyPB
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: Roger While
• Re: Deleted records in Micro Focus Cobol
  • From: Dave Spencer
• Re: Actual COBOL in Commodore 64
  • From: Alistair
• Re: OT: Baby Update
  • From:
• Re: Actual COBOL in Commodore 64
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Actual COBOL in Commodore 64
  • From: HeyBub
• Re: Actual COBOL in Commodore 64
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: OT: Baby Update
  • From: Charles Hottel
• Re: Actual COBOL in Commodore 64
  • From: HeyBub
• Re: OT: Baby Update
  • From: Doug Miller
• OT: Baby Update
  • From: Charles Hottel
• Re: Actual COBOL in Commodore 64
  • From: Stephen W Boyd
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: Actual COBOL in Commodore 64
  • From: SkippyPB
• Re: Actual COBOL in Commodore 64
  • From: SkippyPB
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: Actual COBOL in Commodore 64
  • From: Stephen W Boyd
• Re: Actual COBOL in Commodore 64
  • From:
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: Binyamin Dissen
• Actual COBOL in Commodore 64
  • From: x01001x
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: William M. Klein
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: William M. Klein
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: HeyBub
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From:
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: Binyamin Dissen
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: CG
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: Andreas Lerch
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: HeyBub
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: foodman123
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: LX-i
• Re: Deleted records in Micro Focus Cobol
  • From: Richard
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: MicroFocus Dialog tutorial?
  • From: Paul H
• MicroFocus Dialog tutorial?
  • From: Paul H
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: Clark F Morris
• Deleted records in Micro Focus Cobol
  • From: Dave Spencer
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: Doug Miller
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: Alistair
• Re: COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: Robert Jones
• Re: WAY (OT): What are we?
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: pondering evaluate
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• COBOL subscript range checking
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From:
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From:
• Re: WAY (OT): What are we?
  • From: Jeff Campbell
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Security was Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: Clark F Morris
• Security was Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Clark F Morris
• Re: Bank may need computer program
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: WAY (OT): What are we?
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: pondering evaluate
  • From: LX-i
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: Robert Jones
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: HeyBub
• Re: COBOL in Commodore 64
  • From: Robert Jones
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From:
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: Alistair
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: Alistair
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: Alistair
• Re: pondering evaluate
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: Paagraphs and Sections
  • From: Alistair
• Re: Laugh-Generating Situations
  • From: Alistair
• Re: WAY (OT): What are we?
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causesfall through)
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• WAY (OT): What are we?
  • From: tlmfru
• Re: pondering evaluate
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: pondering evaluate
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: pondering evaluate
  • From: Rick Smith
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: Sergey Kashyrin
• Re: Bank may need computer program
  • From: Sergey Kashyrin
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: HeyBub
• Re: pondering evaluate
  • From: Zbikow
• Re: pondering evaluate
  • From: Rick Smith
• Bank may need computer program
  • From: HeyBub
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From:
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Richard
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Paagraphs and Sections
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Paagraphs and Sections
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Laugh-Generating Situations
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: COBOL in Commodore 64
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: pondering evaluate
  • From: LX-i
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: LX-i
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: LX-i
• Re: pondering evaluate
  • From:
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: LX-i
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From:
• Re: Laugh-Generating Situations
  • From:
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Alistair
• pondering evaluate
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Doug Miller
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: Alistair
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: Alistair
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: Alistair
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: Alistair
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: Alistair
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: Alistair
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From:
• Re: Looking For Production Version of CobolScript
  • From: Alistair
• Re: Paagraphs and Sections
  • From: Alistair
• Re: Laugh-Generating Situations
  • From: Alistair
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: Laugh-Generating Situations
  • From: Alistair
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causesfall through)
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: Robert Jones
• Re: COBOL in Commodore 64
  • From: Robert Jones
• Re: Looking For Production Version of CobolScript
  • From: George McGinn
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Richard
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Richard
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: Richard
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Doug Miller
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: Judson McClendon
• Re: Paagraphs and Sections
  • From: Judson McClendon
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: HeyBub
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: George McGinn
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Doug Miller
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Doug Miller
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: COBOL in Commodore 64
  • From: SkippyPB
• Re: COBOL in Commodore 64
  • From:
• COBOL in Commodore 64
  • From: x01001x
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From:
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Richard
• Looking For Production Version of CobolScript
  • From: George McGinn
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From:
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Richard
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From:
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Clark F Morris
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: Clark F Morris
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: [OT] Laugh-Generating Situations
  • From: tlmfru
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: tlmfru
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: tlmfru
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: Robert Jones
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From:
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From:
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Rick Smith
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Rick Smith
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: HeyBub
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Doug Miller
• Re: Laugh-Generating Situations
  • From:
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From:
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: donald tees
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From:
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From:
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From:
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: LX-i
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: LX-i
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: LX-i
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: Alistair
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Laugh-Generating Situations
  • From: Alistair
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: HeyBub
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Doug Miller
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Doug Miller
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Doug Miller
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Doug Miller
• Ultimate efficiency using INITIALIZE statement in COBOL
  • From: ctolhurs
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• [OT] Laugh-Generating Situations
  • From:
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From:
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From:
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From:
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Richard
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Richard
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: LX-i
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: LX-i
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: LX-i
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Doug Miller
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: nested programs
  • From: Alistair
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Doug Miller
• Re: nested programs
  • From: LX-i
• Re: MicroFocus .INT & .GNT
  • From: Richard
• Re: MicroFocus .INT & .GNT
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• nested programs
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Richard
• Re: MicroFocus .INT & .GNT
  • From: Richard
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Frank Swarbrick
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Rick Smith
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From:
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Howard Brazee
• MicroFocus .INT & .GNT
  • From: Paul H
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From:
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From:
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: tlmfru
• Re: OT: Kangaroo straights
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From:
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From:
• Re: OT: Kangaroo straights
  • From:
• Re: OT: Kangaroo straights
  • From:
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Doug Miller
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Richard
• Re: OT: Kangaroo straights
  • From: SkippyPB
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Richard
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: OT: Kangaroo straights
  • From: Alistair
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From:
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• OT: Daleks
  • From: Alistair
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From:
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From:
• Re: OT: Kangaroo straights
  • From:
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Doug Miller
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Alistair
• OT: Kangaroo straights
  • From: Alistair
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Alistair
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From:
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From:
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From:
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Rick Smith
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Binyamin Dissen
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Richard
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Rick Smith
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From:
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: LX-i
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: HeyBub
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From:
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Richard
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Alistair
• Re: Urgent requirement for Mainframe
  • From:
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: Tracing paragraph Names in Pro Cobol
  • From:
• Re: Urgent requirement for Mainframe
  • From: SkippyPB
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Rick Smith
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: tlmfru
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Binyamin Dissen
• Re: Tracing paragraph Names in Pro Cobol
  • From: balaji . amarnath
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: John Reagan
• Re: Tracing paragraph Names in Pro Cobol
  • From:
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From:
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From:
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From:
• Re: Tracing paragraph Names in Pro Cobol
  • From: Binyamin Dissen
• Re: Tracing paragraph Names in Pro Cobol
  • From: balaji . amarnath
• Re: Tracing paragraph Names in Pro Cobol
  • From: William M. Klein
• Re: Tracing paragraph Names in Pro Cobol
  • From: Richard
• Re: Tracing paragraph Names in Pro Cobol
  • From: balaji . amarnath
• Re: Baby Update
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Richard
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causesfallthrough)
  • From: tlmfru
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: tlmfru
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: LX-i
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: LX-i
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Richard
• Re: MFCOBOL (Dos version), XP and COBLIB.DLE error message
  • From: ozzy . kopec
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: Paagraphs and Sections
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Rick Smith
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Rick Smith
• Paagraphs and Sections
  • From: William M. Klein
• Re: Urgent requirement for Mainframe
  • From:
• [OT] Interesting Housing Data (was Re: COBOL Developer)
  • From:
• Re: Urgent requirement for Mainframe
  • From: SkippyPB
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: HeyBub
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Doug Miller
• Baby Update
  • From: Charles Hottel
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Howard Brazee
• COBOL Developer
  • From: coboltally
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Howard Brazee
• Re: Position opening for Mainframe
  • From:
• Re: Urgent requirement for Mainframe
  • From:
• Re: Urgent requirement for Mainframe
  • From:
• Re: Urgent requirement for Mainframe
  • From:
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From:
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Binyamin Dissen
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From:
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fallthrough)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Alistair
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Alistair
• OT: fishy smells
  • From: Alistair
• Re: Urgent requirement for Mainframe
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From:
• Position opening for Mainframe
  • From: smriti
• Urgent requirement for Mainframe
  • From: smriti
• Urgent requirement for Mainframe
  • From: smriti
• Urgent requirement for Mainframe
  • From: smriti
• Re: Tracing paragraph Names in Pro Cobol
  • From:
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Richard
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Richard
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Rick Smith
• Re: Tracing paragraph Names in Pro Cobol
  • From: balaji . amarnath
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fallthrough)
  • From: Arnold Trembley
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Rick Smith
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Richard
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Richard
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Rick Smith
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Richard
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Richard
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Doug Miller
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: LX-i
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Doug Miller
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Doug Miller
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Rick Smith
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Rick Smith
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Doug Miller
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Doug Miller
• Re: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through
  • From: Rick Smith
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood
• Re: ALTER design (Was: Code problems with Perform Thru Exit causes fall through)
  • From: Pete Dashwood

We are proud to have Web Hosting and Rack Housing from 9 Net Avenue Deutschland.
(15)