Misplaced Pages

Talk:COBOL: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 22:45, 17 November 2014 editLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,304,379 editsm Archiving 31 discussion(s) to Talk:COBOL/Archive 1) (bot← Previous edit Revision as of 23:20, 17 November 2014 edit undoRedrose64 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators273,225 edits sign all unsigned postsNext edit →
Line 28: Line 28:


==Current total for lines of COBOL programs== ==Current total for lines of COBOL programs==
The article (based on 1981 data?) claims that little new code is being written in Cobol. A more current estimate is at 5 billion codelines a year, so perhaps it depends on the definition of "little"... (See for instance http://www.cobolwebler.com/cobolfacts.htm, citing Gartner Group as a source.) The article (based on 1981 data?) claims that little new code is being written in Cobol. A more current estimate is at 5 billion codelines a year, so perhaps it depends on the definition of "little"... (See for instance http://www.cobolwebler.com/cobolfacts.htm, citing Gartner Group as a source.) <small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 20:05, 9 February 2004‎</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP -->


==Strange use of second generation language== ==Strange use of second generation language==
Line 38: Line 38:
would be FORTRAN and BASIC. If someone else doesn't would be FORTRAN and BASIC. If someone else doesn't
correct it soon I may do so. It is a clear mistake. correct it soon I may do so. It is a clear mistake.
enhandle nov 2004 <small><span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 02:48, 14 November 2004‎</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->
enhandle nov 2004


== CoBOL or COBOL? == == CoBOL or COBOL? ==

Revision as of 23:20, 17 November 2014

The contents of the Picture clause page were merged into COBOL on 8 August 2014. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page.
COBOL received a peer review by Misplaced Pages editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the COBOL article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: Index, 1Auto-archiving period: 31 days 
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconComputing: Software High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as High-importance).
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconComputer science Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Computer science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Computer science related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Computer scienceWikipedia:WikiProject Computer scienceTemplate:WikiProject Computer scienceComputer science
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Things you can help WikiProject Computer science with:

 Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
Archiving icon
Archives
Index
Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 31 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

Current total for lines of COBOL programs

The article (based on 1981 data?) claims that little new code is being written in Cobol. A more current estimate is at 5 billion codelines a year, so perhaps it depends on the definition of "little"... (See for instance http://www.cobolwebler.com/cobolfacts.htm, citing Gartner Group as a source.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.111.138.138 (talk) 20:05, 9 February 2004‎

Strange use of second generation language

Where does come your use of second generation language: it is usually reserved for assembly languages. -- Hgfernan 12 May 2004

I agree. COBOL is a third generation language. other examples of third generation languages would be FORTRAN and BASIC. If someone else doesn't correct it soon I may do so. It is a clear mistake. enhandle nov 2004 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Enhandle (talk • contribs) 02:48, 14 November 2004‎

CoBOL or COBOL?

This isn't a big deal to me, but did anyone else learn it as "CoBOL" (Common Business Oriented Language)? Any old-schoolers out there who learned on punch cards? Woo-hoo! Lightbreather (talk) 00:38, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

I only ever saw it written as COBOL, but often wondered how a lower case "o" became an upper case "O" in the acronym. HiLo48 (talk) 02:03, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
@Lightbreather: I think it's just because everything was all caps (sixbit) in the early days... FORTRAN was all-caps too. The good ol' days before that was CONSIDERED SHOUTING & UNCIVIL. Yup, I learned on punch cards, and before that... BASIC on punched tape – the same way Bill Gates learned it. Check out Timeline of DOS operating systems. Wbm1058 (talk) 02:38, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Proposed merger of Picture clause

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion was merge via silent consensus.

I believe Picture clause should be merged into the COBOL article as it is primarily a COBOL feature. The article is small and will fit easily into this article. EdwardH (talk) 09:07, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. Categories: