From owner-freebsd-questions Fri Jun 21 18:48:47 1996 Return-Path: owner-questions Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id SAA17266 for questions-outgoing; Fri, 21 Jun 1996 18:48:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jraynard.demon.co.uk (jraynard.demon.co.uk [158.152.42.77]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id SAA17256 for ; Fri, 21 Jun 1996 18:48:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from fqueries@localhost) by jraynard.demon.co.uk (8.7.5/8.6.12) id WAA10403; Fri, 21 Jun 1996 22:40:09 GMT Date: Fri, 21 Jun 1996 22:40:09 GMT Message-Id: <199606212240.WAA10403@jraynard.demon.co.uk> From: James Raynard To: terry@lambert.org CC: dss-gmbh@t-online.de, questions@freebsd.org In-reply-to: <199606211704.KAA18523@phaeton.artisoft.com> (message from Terry Lambert on Fri, 21 Jun 1996 10:04:20 -0700 (MST)) Subject: Re: COBOL compiler with FreeBSD Sender: owner-questions@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk >>>>> Terry Lambert writes: > > Actually, I have to admit to a certain fondness for the idea of > having a COBOL compiler available, if for no other reason than to > support the massive amount of legacy code out there, and for the > ability to have verifiability, even if it means that the language > limits the complexity of the algorithms you can encode in it. There is actually a GNU FORTRAN compiler for similar reasons, though I think it's still only in beta (the guy who's writing it started work on in something like 1988!). In a way, it's a shame they didn't get round to doing one for COBOL. -- James Raynard, Edinburgh, Scotland james@jraynard.demon.co.uk