From: arne@vajhoej.dk   
      
   On 12/1/2025 10:05 PM, bill wrote:   
   > On 12/1/2025 8:44 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:   
   >> On 12/1/2025 8:23 PM, bill wrote:   
   >>> UNICODE the same thing.  It could be done fairly easily with a library   
   >>> but isn't really anything that COBOL had to have as a part of the   
   >>> language.   
   >>   
   >> Good unicode support require support in both language and   
   >> basic RTL.   
   >   
   > Don't agree.   
      
   It does - see C++ examples given.   
      
   >            COBOL was intended to keep track of money, inventory,   
   > personnel, etc.  UNICODE, per se,  brings nothing to the table for   
   > any of that.   
      
   Whether supporting unicode requires language and basic RTL support   
   is not the same question as whether unicode support is desirable.   
      
   But unicode support becomes somewhat desirable when you need to   
   support all Latin languages and very desirable when you start   
   supporting non-Latin languages.   
      
   >>> Wouldn't classes fall under OOP.   
   >>   
   >> Classes is part of OOP that was added in Cobol 2002.   
   >   
   > And the COBOL Community refused to drink the Kool-Aid.   
   > While there may actually be a place for OOP, the work   
   > COBOL was intended to do isn't it.  Academia tried to   
   > force it down everyone's throats and were outraged   
   > when some refused. (And took their revenge which is   
   > being felt more and more every day now!!)  I know a   
   > number of massive ISes in use today that have been in   
   > use for around a half century that were written in COBOL   
   > and continue to function in COBOL. Lack of OOP hasn't   
   > affected them at all.   
      
   The Cobol code still does what it did when it was written.   
      
   But don't expect leadership of the orgs to be happy with   
   them.   
      
   Cost, speed of development, integration with other systems etc..   
      
   >> Collection classes was added in:   
   >>   
   >> ISO/IEC TR 24717:2009, Information technology -- Programming   
   >> languages, their environments and system software interfaces --   
   >> Collection classes for programming language COBOL   
   >>   
   >> I have never seen it used and I do not know how they work. But if it is   
   >> like collection classes in most other programming languages, then it   
   >> is predefined container classes for list, map/dictionary etc..   
   >   
   > Which does what for COBOL?   
      
   Not sure what they would do in Cobol, if they   
   were actually used.   
      
   In other languages they have more or less made arrays   
   obsolete.   
      
   :-)   
      
   Arne   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)