Line ASequential - FIXED LENGTH
in [Cobol]
|
Prev: RosettaCode
Next: persisting Object Refences in COBOL
From: James Gavan on 11 Aug 2010 17:19 Pete Dashwood wrote: > James Gavan wrote: >>Howard Brazee wrote: >> >>>There are some compilers that allow modification of these rules. >>>(Vax, for one). >>> >> >>OK Howard - again one of your one-liners. Just how relevant do you >>think your information was to somebody 'New to COBOL' ? > > > It's a perfectly valid comment for anyone interested in COBOL. > > Better a succinct "one-liner" than a rambling treatise that disseminates > mis-information, (like Line Squential files being "fixed length") and is no > help to someone having problems with LAN addressing. > > Pete. OK I'm not going to comment on the topic until I know what it is I posted. As I said earlier, lost my e-mails and I don't go back beyond May 2010 for CLC. Tried searching, but can't find the message to which you were referring. Care to re-post my message here so I know what was said. I can tell you one thing though, ever since using RM/COBOL I always understood the ability of records to be varying in length. So somewhat surprised in what I read from Micro Focus that the result is Fixed Length in the output file. What puzzles me is that my mind is completely blank on what you say I wrote. Old Age short-term memory loss ? My 'discovery' of the M/F info was sometime early in this year, probably around May, and I might add I adjusted my thinking to follow that. Nothing triggers in my mind or why I would introduce the subject in CLC. Now as opposed to 'forgetting' I do 'recall', sometime after May perhaps, that Richard used the phrase 'Line Sequentials are Fixed' or some such. If he didn't, then I am truly going nuts !!!! DD : Homework Exercise - I really don't have any success when searching CLC, combination of Thunderbird for e-mail and Google searching. You sure seem to be able to quickly put your hands on stuff. Have you got it stored in an archive on your machine - or what else, (different search engine ?), are you using ? Jimmy, Calgary AB
From: Anonymous on 11 Aug 2010 18:29 In article <htE8o.6905$wJ1.1792(a)newsfe08.iad>, James Gavan <jgavan(a)shaw.ca> wrote: [snip] >DD : Homework Exercise - I really don't have any success when searching >CLC, combination of Thunderbird for e-mail and Google searching. I used to have success with homework... but this assignment I think my dog ate... or maybe nobody ate it and it's just a dog's breakfast... or you're not referring to me at all, that's why I sit behind the Smart Kid and weave and bob around so Teacher will not see me... or some of the above? >You >sure seem to be able to quickly put your hands on stuff. Have you got it >stored in an archive on your machine - or what else, (different search >engine ?), are you using ? I use DejaNews... errrr, Google Groups. For this one I tried '"line sequential" "fixed length" gavan group:comp.lang.cobol' (no single-quotes but the double-quotes included) and got ten results. A sort on date shows the most recent was 8 Aug 2006 and the earliest 24 Sep 2000. (Either the statute of limitations has expired or someone is working in COBOL-time, where code that is old enough to vote is barely proving its worth.) DD
From: Pete Dashwood on 11 Aug 2010 19:46 James Gavan wrote: > Pete Dashwood wrote: >> James Gavan wrote: >>> Howard Brazee wrote: >>> >>>> There are some compilers that allow modification of these rules. >>>> (Vax, for one). >>>> >>> >>> OK Howard - again one of your one-liners. Just how relevant do you >>> think your information was to somebody 'New to COBOL' ? >> >> >> It's a perfectly valid comment for anyone interested in COBOL. >> >> Better a succinct "one-liner" than a rambling treatise that >> disseminates mis-information, (like Line Squential files being >> "fixed length") and is no help to someone having problems with LAN >> addressing. Pete. > > OK I'm not going to comment on the topic until I know what it is I > posted. As I said earlier, lost my e-mails and I don't go back beyond > May 2010 for CLC. Tried searching, but can't find the message to which > you were referring. > > Care to re-post my message here so I know what was said. > > I can tell you one thing though, ever since using RM/COBOL I always > understood the ability of records to be varying in length. So somewhat > surprised in what I read from Micro Focus that the result is Fixed > Length in the output file. > > What puzzles me is that my mind is completely blank on what you say I > wrote. Old Age short-term memory loss ? My 'discovery' of the M/F info > was sometime early in this year, probably around May, and I might add > I adjusted my thinking to follow that. Nothing triggers in my mind or > why I would introduce the subject in CLC. > > Now as opposed to 'forgetting' I do 'recall', sometime after May > perhaps, that Richard used the phrase 'Line Sequentials are Fixed' or > some such. If he didn't, then I am truly going nuts !!!! > > DD : Homework Exercise - I really don't have any success when > searching CLC, combination of Thunderbird for e-mail and Google > searching. You sure seem to be able to quickly put your hands on > stuff. Have you got it stored in an archive on your machine - or what > else, (different search engine ?), are you using ? > > Jimmy, Calgary AB Jimmy, it really doesn't matter and is not important. I mentioned it because you scolded Howard for being brief and that was completely unfair. The reference was to a very long post you made in the MF forum which I happened to come across by accident, while looking for something else. Bob Hennessey had asked for help with a LAN addressing problem and instead of actually helping him you went into a very long discourse about files where you mentioned that Line Sequential files are fixed length. In fact they vary across platforms but are usually delimited by CR/LF and can therefore be fixed or variable in COBOL terms. Many other software systems use these files and they are only "fixed Length" in terms of COBOL IF you define them with a specific record length. Like I said, it really doesn't matter but what annoyed me was that you could have a go at Howard for being succinct when your own posts were sometimes long, rambling, unhelpful, and inaccurate. I mailed Bob privately and resolved his LAN problem. I didn't post in the MF forum to spare you embarrassment and to avoid a flame war over somethng that really doesn't matter much. I only mentioned it here because you were out of order criticising Howard. Pete. -- "I used to write COBOL...now I can do anything."
From: Pete Dashwood on 11 Aug 2010 19:48 docdwarf(a)panix.com wrote: > In article <htE8o.6905$wJ1.1792(a)newsfe08.iad>, > James Gavan <jgavan(a)shaw.ca> wrote: > > [snip] > >> DD : Homework Exercise - I really don't have any success when >> searching CLC, combination of Thunderbird for e-mail and Google >> searching. > > I used to have success with homework... but this assignment I think > my dog ate... or maybe nobody ate it and it's just a dog's > breakfast... or you're not referring to me at all, that's why I sit > behind the Smart Kid and weave and bob around so Teacher will not see > me... or some of the above? > >> You >> sure seem to be able to quickly put your hands on stuff. Have you >> got it stored in an archive on your machine - or what else, >> (different search engine ?), are you using ? > > I use DejaNews... errrr, Google Groups. For this one I tried '"line > sequential" "fixed length" gavan group:comp.lang.cobol' (no > single-quotes but the double-quotes included) and got ten results. A > sort on date shows the most recent was 8 Aug 2006 and the earliest 24 > Sep 2000. > > (Either the statute of limitations has expired or someone is working > in COBOL-time, where code that is old enough to vote is barely > proving its worth.) > > DD The reference is explained in a response to Jimmy. Pete. -- "I used to write COBOL...now I can do anything."
From: Richard on 11 Aug 2010 20:00
On Aug 12, 9:19 am, James Gavan <jga...(a)shaw.ca> wrote: > Pete Dashwood wrote: > > James Gavan wrote: > >>Howard Brazee wrote: > > >>>There are some compilers that allow modification of these rules. > >>>(Vax, for one). > > >>OK Howard - again one of your one-liners. Just how relevant do you > >>think your information was to somebody 'New to COBOL' ? > > > It's a perfectly valid comment for anyone interested in COBOL. > > > Better a succinct "one-liner" than a rambling treatise that disseminates > > mis-information, (like Line Squential files being "fixed length") and is no > > help to someone having problems with LAN addressing. > > > Pete. > > OK I'm not going to comment on the topic until I know what it is I > posted. As I said earlier, lost my e-mails and I don't go back beyond > May 2010 for CLC. Tried searching, but can't find the message to which > you were referring. > > Care to re-post my message here so I know what was said. > > I can tell you one thing though, ever since using RM/COBOL I always > understood the ability of records to be varying in length. So somewhat > surprised in what I read from Micro Focus that the result is Fixed > Length in the output file. > > What puzzles me is that my mind is completely blank on what you say I > wrote. Old Age short-term memory loss ? My 'discovery' of the M/F info > was sometime early in this year, probably around May, and I might add I > adjusted my thinking to follow that. Nothing triggers in my mind or why > I would introduce the subject in CLC. > > Now as opposed to 'forgetting' I do 'recall', sometime after May > perhaps, that Richard used the phrase 'Line Sequentials are Fixed' or > some such. If he didn't, then I am truly going nuts !!!! You are truly going nuts, but that is independent of whether I said that or not. I did say a few _years_ ago: http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.cobol/browse_thread/thread/9c20cfe19b7b0ae/441df7f1d98776b9?lnk=gst&q=CBR_TRAILING_BLANK_RECORD#441df7f1d98776b9 |