I don't think I'd mind the coding, but I'd probably never do COBOL because there's likely to to be a certain management culture around legacy code that is still COBOL even after the "emergency" redefinition of two-digit years to wrap at 1920-2019 has run out.
languages like C/C++ had way worse Y2K problems than COBOL, it is just that dufuses like to say, "hurr durr, still using COBOL?!?!" I was doing consulting at the time, and I never saw anybody wrapping years at 1920. Everybody switched to 4-digit years.
I know that SAS used date windowing. But that is C.
In COBOL you'd have to do that by hand, and it doesn't save much work. And when it was done in COBOL it was often like 1960-2059 in the first place.
exactly it was duplicate a copy book, change the record and add a few conditionals in the programs to use the correct record definition when reading data from sources older than the y2k fix, where you would than also assume 19XX.
COBOL systems were some of the easiest stuff to fix. At least when compared to C anything where its a whole heck of a lot more risky to change a record/struct/union's size without understanding a lot of program internals.
In the realm of scientific observation, luck is granted only to those who are
prepared.
- Louis Pasteur
Finally the wait is over! (Score:1)
I waited for decades, decades to finally be able to work with COBOL on Raspberry Pi ... oh wait.
Seriously in the current market why would anyone half decent at coding would start working on COBOL projects?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Finally the wait is over! (Score:2)
languages like C/C++ had way worse Y2K problems than COBOL, it is just that dufuses like to say, "hurr durr, still using COBOL?!?!"
I was doing consulting at the time, and I never saw anybody wrapping years at 1920. Everybody switched to 4-digit years.
I know that SAS used date windowing. But that is C.
In COBOL you'd have to do that by hand, and it doesn't save much work. And when it was done in COBOL it was often like 1960-2059 in the first place.
Re: (Score:2)
exactly it was duplicate a copy book, change the record and add a few conditionals in the programs to use the correct record definition when reading data from sources older than the y2k fix, where you would than also assume 19XX.
COBOL systems were some of the easiest stuff to fix. At least when compared to C anything where its a whole heck of a lot more risky to change a record/struct/union's size without understanding a lot of program internals.