Reply to post: Re: Managed COBOL?

Job ad promises 'Meaningless Repetitive Work on the .NET Stack'


Re: Managed COBOL?

The staggering thing to contemplate is that even "native"* COBOL already had all the real benefits of "managed" code. No memory management to worry about, highly abstracted framework for system level services etc etc. How much Win32 or even .NET code is going to simply recompile and run on the future-current stacks in 35 years time ? Heck, even 15 year old .NET code won't compile and run (unless you use 15 year old compilers).

In fact, the only real problem with it was that it is a truly fugly language (tho' not a fair accusation at the time of it's inception given the alternatives) that was so abstracted up the wazoo that it made understanding even the simplest code an exercise in recall, after having committed to memory every obscure detail of the underlying frameworks that made the abstractions possible.

* the distinction between "managed" and "native" COBOL is forced upon the vendors in order that their customers can discriminate between the .NET (managed) and Win32/*nix/etc (native) platforms.

In fact, C# really is the new COBOL (but without the stability or dependability). :)

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019