In article <E6KdnWrCca09AALCnZ2dnUU7-cPNnZ2d@giganews.com>,
Arnold Trembley <arnold.trembley@att.net> wrote:
[snip]
You can ACCEPT FROM CONSOLE without defining a file for your console
input, and similarly you DISPLAY UPON CONSOLE without defining a file
for console output.
Back in the Oldene Dayse it was taught that coding an ACCEPT FROM CONSOLE (except underr documented request from someone who Still Worked There) was considered grounds for immediate termination due to incompetence... and
for disturbing the Ops crew, as well.
DD
On 11/1/2020 11:59 PM, docdwarf@panix.com wrote:
In article <E6KdnWrCca09AALCnZ2dnUU7-cPNnZ2d@giganews.com>,
Arnold Trembley <arnold.trembley@att.net> wrote:
[snip]
You can ACCEPT FROM CONSOLE without defining a file for your console
input, and similarly you DISPLAY UPON CONSOLE without defining a file
for console output.
Back in the Oldene Dayse it was taught that coding an ACCEPT FROM CONSOLE
(except underr documented request from someone who Still Worked There) was >> considered grounds for immediate termination due to incompetence... and
for disturbing the Ops crew, as well.
Doc,
Certainly that would be a bad way to code COBOL on an IBM mainframe
running DOS/VS or MVS (or successor operating systems) any time in the
last 56 years up through today.
But it might be appropriate for someone learning COBOL on a website >simulator!
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 285 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 76:10:16 |
Calls: | 6,489 |
Calls today: | 2 |
Files: | 12,096 |
Messages: | 5,276,210 |