Re: Today (Feb 26) IBM announcements



"Howard Brazee" <howard@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:60kds353b7f9nkqjphund2g8q3t34b3g2i@xxxxxxxxxx
On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 14:51:24 +1300, "Pete Dashwood"
<dashwood@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I still think that the paradigm is important and that means Java will have
a
place, for a lot longer than COBOL.

Than CoBOL will, or than CoBOL has?

I can't see ANY other language (with the possible exception of FORTRAN;
successful because it is ideally adapted to the niche it serves...) having
as long a life as COBOL has and will.

If widespread in-house COBOL development ceases by 2015 (as I have
consistently predicted since 1997), COBOL will have had a "useful lifetime"
of 56 years.

Java would be pushing to match this. I believe there are things in the
pipeline which will revolutionize how computer applications are developed,
and I still believe that ultimately, users will simply interact with smart
software to achieve the results they want. "Programming" as we understand it
now, in the sequential Von Neumann model, will not be necessary or
desirable.

Computer programming was a 20th century phenomenon. (I realise that people
who are working right now on maintaining last century's code will smile at
that :-) but I still believe it to be largely true.)

We are seeing more and more powerful development systems emerging, and these
systems require more conceptual understanding than grunt level code.

Recently, I watched a team of three people from MicroSoft New Zealand
demonstrate the building of a complete Web based application, from scratch,
in two hours, using the new tools currently being launched (Visual Studio
2008, Server 2008, and SQL Server 2008). This wasn't just a few web pages
cobbled together in HTML, it was a complete, fully functional application
that tracked an ongoing tour, with clickable maps, images and videos, and
full database search and support. It employed Ajax and Silverlight and even
with very little knowledge of these products I could see what they were
doing. Two hours. From absolutely nothing. I remember when this would have
been a three or four week job.

Todays programmers are growing up with smart tools that simply generate what
is needed when it is needed. The language is irrelevant. Scripting holds it
together and can be changed on the fly. There is no requirement for "low
level" programming. (I think it was Tim who noted in a recent post that many
CS graduates can't program; ....they don't need to...) The world is
changing. Rapidly. And this is just the beginning.

For myself, I still enjoy sitting down and writing code to build application
components that will then be glued together. But I wouldn't delude myself
into thinking that this approach will be pertinent in tomorrow's world... It
won't be.

Fortunately, I probably won't be around to grieve over it... :-)

Pete.
--
"I used to write COBOL...now I can do anything."



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Wang COBOL alive and well as Wang VS makes a comeback
    ... I fought to the last to keep COBOL at least peripherally in the ... will be the next language du jour... ... This contributes to the stability of programming efforts ... level of COBOL to another can be as big a deal as migrating across platforms ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)
  • Re: 7E7 Flight Controls Electronics
    ... was just good thing that that localization was not too easy - it would ... Please don't confuse abstraction skills of typical COBOL programmer (that ... I pointed at the current programming "biblioware" for commercial data ... > language was because I learned all the workarounds. ...
    (comp.lang.ada)
  • Re: Structured Coding
    ... more visual, some are more conceptual, some are more language oriented. ... I had major problems struggling with OO COBOL when it was first released. ... programming language ever written; light hearted, witty, amusing, ... Later I had to run some courses in Java Web programming and ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)
  • Re: New Cobol compiler written in Cobol
    ... It didn't have a visible operating system. ... > If I were writing a Cobol compiler, I wouldn't look at today's market. ... > What will a programming language need to be successful in that world? ... They'll use a language they can understand at a glance. ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)
  • Re: Gartner on Assessing the Age of Software Languages and Tools
    ... It's doing some Romero-level twitching, ... We have a lot of customers with no mainframe COBOL at all, ... COBOL.NET does everything that any other .NET language does. ... And of course the whole *point* of the CLI/CLR is that it simplifies mixed-language programming, so it's trivial to use one .NET language for the bulk of an application, and drop into another if it is better suited for some particular aspect. ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)