Re: gnubol: How do we parse this language, anyway?

["Boris Kortiak" <BKortiak@genlyte.com>]

>>> <RKRayhawk@aol.com> 12/09/99 04:13PM >>>
<snip>
  RKR > I am not in  a position to challenge your assessment at all that there is 
  RKR > little code base issue. I do solicit others views on that however, with all 
  RKR > due respect. And I mean that most dererentially. Posts seem to indicate that 
  RKR > there was more than Micro Focus's compiler that could be supporting code base 
  RKR > that is 'extended'.  
<snip>

A simple question here.  Would it be prudent to develop the compiler to exactly meet the standard, with an eye to coming standards and widespread extensions, but without actually coding for the new standards and widespread extensions.  Once there is a good and working compiler would not the very nature of it being a gpl product allow for the development, perhaps independently, of dialects?  This way if I need to convert Foo COBOL to gnu COBOL, I can find the necessary dialect bits, recompile the compiler and I'm off.  In the best case, I would already get the compiler with various dialects available and just select which I want to use through the simple expedient of a compile time switch.

Of course, as usual, I may be completely misunderstanding how this works.



--
This message was sent through the gnu-cobol mailing list.  To remove yourself
from this mailing list, send a message to majordomo@lusars.net with the
words "unsubscribe gnu-cobol" in the message body.  For more information on
the GNU COBOL project, send mail to gnu-cobol-owner@lusars.net.