RE: gnubol: The many different types of numbering systems used in Cobol.

["William M. Klein" <wmklein@ix.netcom.com>]

Actually, Micro Focus provides three solutions to your "examine" issue:

1) If you use the OSVS directive (which can be used IN ADDITION TO the ANS85
directive), it will accept ACCEPT syntax (along with the ON verb, TRANSFORM,
and several others)

2) You can use the ADD-RESERVE directive (that isn't the directives name, but
I know there is one that lets you "equate" any word with any existing
reserved word.  This is actually quite useful for doing COBOL programming in
languages such as French or Spanish)

3) You can use the VOCABULARY feature which allows you to "create your own
syntax).

   ***

All of those are Micro Focus features.  I don't think ANY of them should be a
high priority for the GNU project, but are certainly things that could be
considered for a future enhancement. (First, you get current Standard support
in, then you worry about extensions.)

Bill Klein
  wmklein <at> ix.netcom.com

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnu-cobol@wallace.lusars.net
> [mailto:owner-gnu-cobol@wallace.lusars.net]On Behalf Of Charlie Ebert
> Sent: Sunday, January 09, 2000 10:24 AM
> To: gnu-cobol@lusars.net
> Subject: Re: gnubol: The many different types of numbering systems used
> in Cobol.
>
>
> Well okay...  How about this then Bill.
> Will there be some form of compiler directives file for which
> substitute words
> could be included.
> E.G.  upon hitting EXAMINE we replace with INSPECT....
>
> We have such a thing we use in Micro Focus right now to insert a COMP-6
> everywhere you see the
> word COMP.
>
> And so on an so forth.
>
> Charlie
>
>
>
>
> "William M. Klein" wrote:
>
> > How about my answering the EASIEST part of this whole note.
> >
> > EXAMINE was *not* a part of the '74 Standard (although many
> vendors included
> > it as an "extension").  Therefore, the addition of the INSPECT CONVERTING
> > option did cover this functionality (while the '74 only supported INSPECT
> > REPLACING).
> >
> > I am not positive whether EXAMINE was or was not in the '68 Standard - or
> > whether it has always been an extension.
> >
> > Bill Klein
> >   wmklein <at> ix.netcom.com
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> >   <snip>
> > >
> > > By the way.  85 supports the INSPECT command but they did away
> > > with EXAMINE yet
> > > the two
> > > verbs are functionally the same command.  The syntax is identical
> > > from what I've
> > > seen.
> > > Is there any reason to eliminate the verb EXAMINE?
> > >
> >
> > --
> > 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.
>
>
> --
> 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.


--
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.