Wed, 14 Jun 2000 10:28:49 -0600
I knew someone would disagree with me, which is why I went on to refine my
meaning of respect. As someone who did research in compilers, I have to
take strong exception to any language whose tokens cannot be specified with
context-insensitive regular expressions (note in FORTRAN spaces are
irrelevant, so "DOI" might mean a variable of that name or "DO I", the
beginning of a loop), and/or whose syntax cannot be represented by an LR(1)
I still can't imagine what universities would actually still use COBOL in
their CS curricula.
From: Brashear, Phil [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 10:18 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Future of Ada -- Not enough "Ada people"
Martin (Carlisle) said:
"but no self-respecting Comp Sci department I know teaches COBOL anymore. .
and then goes on to refine his meaning of "respect".
I don't agree. Now I don't like COBOL any better than the next guy, but I
respect its place in
the world -- and not only historically. Some respectable (in my mind)
departments teach File Processing using COBOL. Others encourage their
students to take
COBOL courses taught in other curricula.
The company I work for still does an enormous amount of its business-world
work in COBOL,
as well as C, C++, Java, and whatever else is appropriate for the job
I DO agree with his assessment that it's cost-effective to retrain a good
software engineer in Ada.
Back in the late 80's, when very few schools were teaching Ada, I really
didn't care whether a
recent graduate (for example) already knew the language. I only cared that
they knew how to
work hard and learn quickly -- and it paid off.
Philip W. Brashear
EDS Conformance Testing Center
4646 Needmore Road, Bin 46
P.O. Box 24593
Dayton, OH 45424-0593
[log in to unmask]