6 ms·
There are alternatives, but i'm biased. See my other comment. One of the biggest hurdle we have is that the clients dont usually have many tests in place. Testi
by fork1 9y ago
There are alternatives, but i'm biased. See my other comment.
One of the biggest hurdle we have is that the clients dont usually have many tests in place. Testing and validating a full batch night for example (ie 6 hours of intense batch work) is quite complicated.
- pjmlp 9y agoI see, it is a valid alternative. What do you think about the .NET and JVM Cobol compilers? They seem to be a way to move that code into new systems with no rewrites as well.
- fork1 9y agoWell, i know of at least one client that still has the binaries but not the sources of the cobol. But for the generic case, the mainframe is quite an integrated system, and big clients tend to use a lot of the features at the same time. Even if you can produce an executable or a library, but you ll still need a transaction manager (CICS/IMS-TM), a database (DB2/IMS), MQ, RACF, Datasets, GDG, REXX/JCL, etc. You need the whole ecosystem. And all the binaries will expect a DB2, or a MQ listening on the other side, with near-perfect emulation (return codes, db behaviour such as EBCDIC sorting, etc). Just compiling wont help you much unless you have a very basic use of mostly JCL and batches.