3 ms·
I'd wager the version of COBOL GP used was older. I learned COBOL in the 90s on a personal PC, and it allowed structured programs then. No spaghetti code needed
by ASalazarMX 6y ago
I'd wager the version of COBOL GP used was older. I learned COBOL in the 90s on a personal PC, and it allowed structured programs then. No spaghetti code needed, just PERFORMs and strategically placed periods. Even a program with GOTOs could be made be structured.
- DoomHotel 6y agoI learned structured programming using COBOL in the 1970s on a Xerox Sigma 6 and went on to use it on Burroughs Medium Systems (B3500/B4800).
- denton-scratch 5y agoWell, what I was using was called Burroughs COBOL. I was using it on minicomputers, but it was basically the same COBOL that ran on the big Burroughs mainframes. Mainframes needed to maintain backward compatibility, so I guess the COBOL I was using was 1st-generation. I gave up COBOL before I ever encountered any Structured COBOL. Around that time I performed psychological repression of all memory I had of the language, or even that I'd used it. It has taken years of programming-language therapy for me to start to recover these memories.