[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [open-cobol-list] Bug Report

From: Roger While
Subject: RE: [open-cobol-list] Bug Report
Date: Thu Oct 6 13:58:03 2005

Fixed in CVS,
DATE-MODIFIED is ignored.

And for the tarball :

He-he. Isn't Cobol a lovely language ?  .-)

Should I tear my hair out nw before I take on the
ACCEPT/DISPLAY/SCREEN section or what :-)


At 15:33 06.10.2005 -0500, you wrote:
The answer to this one is actually pretty funny (and it really IS a bug).

DATE-MODIFIED is *not* a valid paragraph name for any IBM (or other compiler
that I know of).

HOWEVER, (and here comes the funny part). IBM (and several other compilers) allow for a "comment-entry" to be in either the A-margin or B-Margin. (The
'85 Standard isn't clear to me as to whether this is an extension or not.)

Therefore, given the construct:

       AUTHOR.        MRK S.
       DATE-WRITTEN.  NOV 07, 2002.
       DATE-MODIFIED. NOV 21, 2002.

the "DATE-MODIFIED. ..." text is (on IBM and several other compilers)
treated as a "comment-entry" portion of the (valid and conforming)
DATE-WRITTEN. paragraph.  You could just as well have coded:

       AUTHOR.        MRK S.
       DATE-WRITTEN.  NOV 07, 2002.
Now-is-the-time. For all good men to come to the aid of their party>

and it would compile. For documentation on continuation of comment-entries,
see the '85 Standard, page VI-6, SR(1).

P.S. A common use of this "feature" is IBM code like the following:

        AUTHOR.   MRK S.
     REMARKS.  OS/VS COBOL allowed for a REMARKS paragraph but
               VS COBOL II and later do not.  However, this works because
               it is actually a part of the AUTHOR paragraph.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: address@hidden
> [mailto:address@hidden On
> Behalf Of Robert Sherry
> Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 2:16 PM
> To: 'John R. Culleton'; address@hidden
> Cc: 'Roger While'
> Subject: RE: [open-cobol-list] Bug Report
> John,
>     You are right. I meant to say: DATE-MODIFIED. Sorry. In
> any event, I
> believe it should work in MVS compatible mode. Do you
> disagree with that?
> Bob Sherry
> -----Original Message-----
> From: address@hidden
> [mailto:address@hidden On
> Behalf Of John R.
> Culleton
> Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 2:46 PM
> To: address@hidden
> Cc: Robert Sherry; 'Roger While'
> Subject: Re: [open-cobol-list] Bug Report
> On Thursday 06 October 2005 06:34 pm, Robert Sherry wrote:
> > John,
> >
> >      While DATE-WRITTEN is not part of standard COBOL it is
> part of IBM
> > COBOL. Therefore it should work with std=mvs.conf. By the
> way, it use to
> > work in Open COBOL.
> >
> > Bob Sherry
> --
> John Culleton

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]