Re: working storage values
- From: Robert <no@xxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2007 16:09:30 -0600
On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 00:11:28 +0000 (UTC), docdwarf@xxxxxxxxx () wrote:
In article <6969359c-00e5-4485-9e94-2e0e0acb1ee1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Richard <riplin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Seeing an example like that, no wonder Cobol is dying.
Some see examples like that every working day on systems that are still
hugely profitable to the companies that run them... a curious sort of
Mainframe systems are hugely EXPENSIVE to the companies that run them. They are hugely
profitable to IBM.
- Prev by Date: Re: working storage values
- Next by Date: Re: CA-Easytrieve Users
- Previous by thread: Re: working storage values
- Next by thread: Re: working storage values