Web Services and COBOL (Fairly long post, but I don't have time to write a proper article on it)
in [Cobol]
|
Prev: Microfocus Cobol "SLEEP" routine
Next: Help with Tcal
From: Pete Dashwood on 31 May 2007 19:09 "Alistair" <alistair(a)ld50macca.demon.co.uk> wrote in message news:1180636643.671727.127390(a)k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com... > On 24 May, 04:24, Richard <rip...(a)Azonic.co.nz> wrote: >> On May 23, 10:02 pm, "Pete Dashwood" >> >> <dashw...(a)removethis.enternet.co.nz> wrote: >> > It was Online Linking and Embedding (OLE). This then evolved into the >> > Common >> > Object Model. >> >> > Fujitsu has supported it since version 3 which I acquired in 1997. It >> > was >> > one of the first OO COBOL compilers. Fujitsu offered it free to people >> > who >> > were using MicroFocus COBOL. >> >> Version 3 did not have OO or OLE. As this version is still (? adtools >> has gone) available it may mislead students into think that it does. >> >> Version 4 introduced OO and OLE in 1998. I have both sets of paper >> manuals. > > v3 was Event driven, as per VB. > No, that was PowerCOBOL V3. Pete.
From: Pete Dashwood on 31 May 2007 19:19 "Charles Hottel" <chottel(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message news:cJD7i.15340$Ut6.7789(a)newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net... > > "Pete Dashwood" <dashwood(a)removethis.enternet.co.nz> wrote in message > news:5c1hsnF2uuqhfU1(a)mid.individual.net... >> >> "Charles Hottel" <chottel(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message >> news:6dL6i.16043$j63.2521(a)newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net... >>> Top Post not more below >>> >>> Hi! Pete, >>> >>> I downloaded Axis 1.4 and if it works as the documentation says I >>> believe it would not be too difficult to do the few steps required to >>> invoke a web service. >>> Not sure when I might get around to it though. >>> >>> My wife is pregnant and we spent today in the emergency room as she was >>> experiencing severe pain on her left side. They think the cause of the >>> pain is not a threat to the baby, but the sonogram showed a possible >>> birth defect ( a hole in the abdominal wall), something like a hernia. >>> Tomorrow they will give us the name of a specialist. If this is the >>> only problem and if the baby can develop long enough then he/she may >>> have a chance. However 25% to 40% of the babies with this problem have >>> other birth defects. I am feeling kind of low and web services will have >>> to take a back seat for quite a while. >>> >>> Sorry to lay this on you. >> >> Absolutely do NOT apologise... :-) There isn't much any of us here can >> do, apart from give you moral support. Speaking only for myself, you have >> it. >> >> >>> I do not have a lot of friends and some of the ones I did have >>> disapproved of my latest marraige and abandoned our friendship. >> >> With "friends" like that, you don't need enemies. People who would judge >> you for your personal actions, which have nothing to do with anyone else, >> are people who you are probably better off without. >> >>> I tried calling my two children but they are not home. The people on >>> this group are pretty much the closest thing I have to friends and I >>> just had to let this out to someone. >> >> I understand. Glad you did. I'm sure some here will know what you are >> going through, and most can empathise with the stress you are under. >> >> Don't worry at all about the web services :-) >> >> My exercise over the weekend went very successfully and I am under less >> pressure now than I was, although I still have a huge amount of work to >> do on the AVS web site. (I spent most of this morning furthering my >> education via a Web Cast on Master Pages and Themes (all really good >> stuff; I am persuaded to stop with CSS and go to themes instead :-))) >> >> On the web service from Java... >> I see the real problem as being able to access COM from Java (Once you >> establish connection to the SOAP COM proxy, the rest is just stamp >> collecting :-)). Bearing this in mind, I found that IBM are offering an >> approach that is free and looks very useful. I have downloaded their >> Bridge2Java software from the article "Bridging the gap to COM" >> >> http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-bridge/ >> >> From my web searches I found a number of offerings that did the same; >> some of them were really excellent, but expensive... >> >> If I can find some time and need a break from C# and Web stuff, I'll >> attempt to implement the Java link to the web service. >> >> However, it might be interesting to compare the IBM approach with the >> Axis one, so please do it if you have time or need to bury yourself in >> something that may help to take your mind off your immmediate problems. >> (In the course of my life I have found working to be a very useful >> therapy when trauma strikes...but that might just be me.) >> >> Meantime, very best wishes for a safe delivery with mother and child both >> fine. Try not to let it get you down. >> >> Pete. >> >> >> >> <previous unreferenced snipped> >> > > I have not spent a lot of time searching but I saw JACOB: JAva COm Bridge > and something from IBM at www.alphaworks.ibm.com/tech/dtjcb > > IIRC with Axis I just need to: > > 1. add a path to the .jar files to my CLASSPATH > 2. run wsdl2java program against the wsdl > 3. write short java program to invoke the web services using the java > generated in step 2 > > Well that is just from a quick glance at the documantation several days > ago. > Yes, the trick is to have something that generates proxy classes for COM access. Bridge2Java does this. It isn't just about web services, as noted elsewhere. Rather than generating code from the wsdl, you can generate code from a COM .olb or typelib. This gives you the interface to that COM component, and that (using the SOAP Toolkit COM component (MSSOAP.SoapClient30) analyses the wsdl and does the web service call, exactly as the COBOL posted by Jimmy and myself. There are a number of approaches to accessing a web service from Java (anything that works is pretty much all right... :-)) but using a standard component is my preferred one. I believe the code for this approach will be considerably less than with the direct approach, because there is more under the covers of the COM component. That's the whole point of components; they provide encapsulated functionality so you don't have to keep writing it. I'm really deep into the AVS website, demos, and downloads currently so I can't really look at this right now, but I hope to later (certainly before the Singularity... :-)) Pete. Pete.
From: Alistair on 1 Jun 2007 12:48 On 1 Jun, 00:09, "Pete Dashwood" <dashw...(a)removethis.enternet.co.nz> wrote: > "Alistair" <alist...(a)ld50macca.demon.co.uk> wrote in message > > news:1180636643.671727.127390(a)k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > On 24 May, 04:24, Richard <rip...(a)Azonic.co.nz> wrote: > >> On May 23, 10:02 pm, "Pete Dashwood" > > >> <dashw...(a)removethis.enternet.co.nz> wrote: > >> > It was Online Linking and Embedding (OLE). This then evolved into the > >> > Common > >> > Object Model. > > >> > Fujitsu has supported it since version 3 which I acquired in 1997. It > >> > was > >> > one of the first OO COBOL compilers. Fujitsu offered it free to people > >> > who > >> > were using MicroFocus COBOL. > > >> Version 3 did not have OO or OLE. As this version is still (? adtools > >> has gone) available it may mislead students into think that it does. > > >> Version 4 introduced OO and OLE in 1998. I have both sets of paper > >> manuals. > > > v3 was Event driven, as per VB. > > No, that was PowerCOBOL V3. > > Pete.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Yep. I thought, after I had just sent the email, that someone (expletives deleted) would correct me on that. It was indeed Powercobol v3.
From: Pete Dashwood on 1 Jun 2007 18:53 "Alistair" <alistair(a)ld50macca.demon.co.uk> wrote in message news:1180716506.641544.60940(a)u30g2000hsc.googlegroups.com... > On 1 Jun, 00:09, "Pete Dashwood" <dashw...(a)removethis.enternet.co.nz> > wrote: >> "Alistair" <alist...(a)ld50macca.demon.co.uk> wrote in message >> >> news:1180636643.671727.127390(a)k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com... >> >> >> >> >> >> > On 24 May, 04:24, Richard <rip...(a)Azonic.co.nz> wrote: >> >> On May 23, 10:02 pm, "Pete Dashwood" >> >> >> <dashw...(a)removethis.enternet.co.nz> wrote: >> >> > It was Online Linking and Embedding (OLE). This then evolved into >> >> > the >> >> > Common >> >> > Object Model. >> >> >> > Fujitsu has supported it since version 3 which I acquired in 1997. >> >> > It >> >> > was >> >> > one of the first OO COBOL compilers. Fujitsu offered it free to >> >> > people >> >> > who >> >> > were using MicroFocus COBOL. >> >> >> Version 3 did not have OO or OLE. As this version is still (? adtools >> >> has gone) available it may mislead students into think that it does. >> >> >> Version 4 introduced OO and OLE in 1998. I have both sets of paper >> >> manuals. >> >> > v3 was Event driven, as per VB. >> >> No, that was PowerCOBOL V3. >> >> Pete.- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > Yep. I thought, after I had just sent the email, that someone > (expletives deleted) would correct me on that. > Nothing personal... just in the interests of accuracy :-) The expletives may well apply anyway :-) Pete.
From: Alistair on 2 Jun 2007 08:16
On 1 Jun, 23:53, "Pete Dashwood" <dashw...(a)removethis.enternet.co.nz> wrote: > "Alistair" <alist...(a)ld50macca.demon.co.uk> wrote in message > > news:1180716506.641544.60940(a)u30g2000hsc.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > On 1 Jun, 00:09, "Pete Dashwood" <dashw...(a)removethis.enternet.co.nz> > > wrote: > >> "Alistair" <alist...(a)ld50macca.demon.co.uk> wrote in message > > >>news:1180636643.671727.127390(a)k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com... > > >> > On 24 May, 04:24, Richard <rip...(a)Azonic.co.nz> wrote: > >> >> On May 23, 10:02 pm, "Pete Dashwood" > > >> >> <dashw...(a)removethis.enternet.co.nz> wrote: > >> >> > It was Online Linking and Embedding (OLE). This then evolved into > >> >> > the > >> >> > Common > >> >> > Object Model. > > >> >> > Fujitsu has supported it since version 3 which I acquired in 1997. > >> >> > It > >> >> > was > >> >> > one of the first OO COBOL compilers. Fujitsu offered it free to > >> >> > people > >> >> > who > >> >> > were using MicroFocus COBOL. > > >> >> Version 3 did not have OO or OLE. As this version is still (? adtools > >> >> has gone) available it may mislead students into think that it does. > > >> >> Version 4 introduced OO and OLE in 1998. I have both sets of paper > >> >> manuals. > > >> > v3 was Event driven, as per VB. > > >> No, that was PowerCOBOL V3. > > >> Pete.- Hide quoted text - > > >> - Show quoted text - > > > Yep. I thought, after I had just sent the email, that someone > > (expletives deleted) would correct me on that. > > Nothing personal... just in the interests of accuracy :-) > > The expletives may well apply anyway :-) > > Pete.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - No, expletives were along the line of "oh, f****** **** I should have said Powercobol; I bet that ******* **** ******** picks me up on that." More in anger at myself than at anyone else. Mind you, if your shoulders are broad enough.... |