Hi donna,
If you used them in the past then I would say that you are still qualified to have a valid opinion.
I admit that I do have a hidden agenda but the main reason does not involve porting.
For many years I have used macros to make my life easier. When I left the e3000, back in 2008, and did some work on other platforms I found I missed them. I'm now in semi-retirement and have been using the free version of MF COBOL (a couple of years) and GnuCOBOL (this last year) to write software for friends, family and my own use.
A couple of times since 2008 I had thought of writing by own macro preprocessor to emulate the one on the e3000. A few months ago I decided to do it and release it as open source under the GNU GPL. The development of preprocessor, using GnuCOBOL, is now completed and in final Beta Testing and I'm writing the manual. Was hoping that I could some additional reasons, from others, as to why you would use macros instead of the copy...replacing and replace statements.
As a port of GnuCOBOL is a available on several platforms, and my preprocessor is written in GnuCOBOL, I see no problem in taking my macros with me nearly every wherever I go. If I end up doing work on a platform that does not support a feature that it is using it shouldn't be to difficult to develop a work-a-round.
So, how about at comment?
Regards,
Robert W.Mills
> On 8 Dec 2014, at 21:21, Donna Hofmeister <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> i'm not sure i'm qualified to comment on this any longer....
>
> but it seems to me that macros were very efficient (and as i recall) very
> flexible (depending on how they were written, of course).
>
> it also seems to me that the 'power of macros' made porting challenging.
>
> so if your hidden agenda involves porting, then i think you'd want to do
> the copy thing. - d
>
> On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 1:09 PM, Robert W.Mills <
> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> But what if you HAD to choose?
>>
>>> On 8 Dec 2014, at 20:41, "Tracy Pierce" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>
>>> No need to choose, you can use them both.
>>>
>>> I say use COPY bookname REPLACING ==string== BY ==newstring==
>>>
>>> I once went to pains to eliminate macro usage but I can't remember why.
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: HP-3000 Systems Discussion [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
>> Behalf
>>> Of Robert W.Mills
>>> Sent: Monday, December 08, 2014 12:34 PM
>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>> Subject: [HP3000-L] Question for COBOL programmers
>>>
>>> Greetings to the -L,
>>>
>>> This is a question for all you COBOL programmers out there.
>>>
>>> You have to choose between using the Macro preprocessor and the
>>> COPY...REPLACING & REPLACE statements.
>>>
>>> Which would you choose and why?
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Robert W.Mills
>>>
>>> * 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 *
>
>
>
> --
> Donna Hofmeister
> Allegro Consultants, Inc.
> 408-252-2330
> Visit us on Linkedin
> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/allegro-consultants-inc->
>
> * 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 *
|
