COBOL lessons?

[Silent-Hunter]

I started learning it on my own, and it feels fairly easy. But there's so much of it, and a lot of the sites I'm learning from don't have all the information.

Does anyone know a good place to learn COBOL?

[Racket_Man]

first question is

WHY??????

sooooo many useless and irrelevant sections, sub-sections, set-ups and not to mention the column restrictions.

Do not make me have flashbacks.

[It's me]

What other languages do you already know? And what version of COBOL are you working at learning?

[MadMike]

We still use it at my job. Hell, we still have a few older processes that were written in Assembler. I can fumble through it if I have to, but what a pain in the ass that is!

My son tells me that while it's not used nearly as much as it once was, COBOL programmers are in demand because the few shops that do still use it are having trouble finding people.

[sms001]

COBOL programmers are in demand because the few shops that do still use it are having trouble finding people.

We called them retrogrammers. But seriously, under the right circumstances, those people can write their own ticket. Most of the legacy COBOL instances are in BIG business - the kind that could afford computers in the 60's and 70's, and if they haven't switched those processes out, it's because they are mission critical. They NEED Cobolers. (And Fortran, etc.)

[Silent-Hunter]

Well, I've been using the OpenCOBOL compiler on my OpenPandora to compile my programs. As for what version of COBOL, that's really all I know. The examples I found, and my own code both run properly when compiled, so I'm not sure. I didn't even know there were different versions.

As for why, I find the code easy to read, and understand.

I used to know Java, but have forgotten most of it after my brain surgery. When I woke up I remembered almost nothing about anything, and a few things never came back. I know a small amount of Java, but I know longer remember most of it.

[mjr]

We called them retrogrammers. But seriously, under the right circumstances, those people can write their own ticket.

LOTS of $$$ involved there, too.

I think at this point, you could be relatively good at it and command a high salary.

Almost makes me wanna learn COBOL.

[MadMike]

I didn't find it all that hard to learn, really. But not everyone had the same experience as me, apparently. Back when I was in college, they actually used to teach it, and they offered two classes. The second class, which was the "advanced" class, started out with 10 people. Throughout the term, three people dropped out, and three more failed the course. I was the only one who managed to get the final program done, and I got it done just under the wire.

One of the funniest moments was in the first class. The teacher was explaining the section names, and pointing out that you didn't have to use the same names as in the examples in the textbook. "You don't have to call it that. You can call it anything you want. You could call it 'horseshit" if you wanted, but please don't."

[Silent-Hunter]

Oh you don't? I assumed that, for example PROCEDURE DIVISION. had to be called that or it wouldn't work. Haha, maybe I should buy a textbook on it. That might be the best way. I doubt any colleges I can afford to go to would still be teaching it.

[Chromatix]

With most programming languages, you can call routines anything (within reason - there are *some* rules), and you just make sure to use the same name when you call it from elsewhere.

There *are* however circumstances where the routine's name is chosen for you. These usually involve either a specification which stipulates them (often called an API), or existing code which relies on them (and you are re-implementing something).

[Silent-Hunter]

Right but I assumed the DIVISION names told the compiler what part was what.

[MadMike]

Oh you don't? I assumed that, for example PROCEDURE DIVISION. had to be called that or it wouldn't work.

Yes, the "divisions" do have to be called by their proper names. But if you set up a section to, for example, calculate interest, you can call it "CALCULATE-INTEREST-SECTION", or "CALC-INT", or even "HORSE-SHIT" if you wanted to. But please don't.

[wolfie]

But if you set up a section to, for example, calculate interest, you can call it "CALCULATE-INTEREST-SECTION", or "CALC-INT", or even "HORSE-SHIT" if you wanted to. But please don't.

Why not call it "HORSE-SHIT"? Is it because "BULL-SHIT", "DOG-SHIT", or "BAT-SHIT" would be more appropriate?

[Chromatix]

There were a few models of Macs that were especially poorly designed, to the point of threatening to ruin the entire Apple brand. LowEndMac calls them "Road Apples".

Road Apples is, of course, a euphemism for horse shit.

[Silent-Hunter]

Hahaha!

But I am actually determined to learn this. It's the one I've gotten furthest with learning so far. Wasn't so good at Java, and I actually went to school for that.