While it's true that COBOL was the preferred language in the "business world" 
for the 3000 the MANMAN application is one of the most stable pieces of software 
I have ever worked with.  I came from a custom COBOL shop before working with 
MANMAN and I must say that when I have a choice between writing in either 
language, I usually choose FORTRAN.  A lot less code to write.

 
Chuck Trites
>[log in to unmask]
>Trites Consulting, Inc.
>P.O. Box 5473
>Weirs Beach, NH 03246
>Phone: (603) 219-1500




________________________________
From: James B. Byrne <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Thu, January 20, 2011 9:42:24 AM
Subject: Re: [HP3000-L] (PLUG) Archiving and Migration of HP3000 ManMan data

On Thu, January 20, 2011 09:25, Chuck Trites wrote:
> Not sure what you mean by COBOL written in FORTRAN?
>

It is a play on the words of an old bromide: "You can write FORTRAN
in any Language."

The FORTRAN language is really not suited to implementing a business
application like MANMAN but that was what the authors evidently felt
most comfortable with.  Either that, or they could not afford HP's
COBOL licence.  Or, perhaps HP COBOL simply did not work reliably,
as I discovered the hard way at NorTel in the early 80s.

In any case, MANMAN's authors had to create, in FORTRAN, all of the
structures provided directly in COBOL.


-- 
***          E-Mail is NOT a SECURE channel          ***
James B. Byrne                mailto:[log in to unmask]
Harte & Lyne Limited          http://www.harte-lyne.ca
9 Brockley Drive              vox: +1 905 561 1241
Hamilton, Ontario             fax: +1 905 561 0757
Canada  L8E 3C3

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *




* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *