Re: COBOL Compiler for Windows

On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 19:47:25 -0400, "Charles Hottel"
<chottel@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

>
>"Graham Hobbs" <ghobbs@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
>news:nb3h141500phmuq82nj3buhtmo5ibr3sfp@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Hello,
>> Thanks for the responses. Learning all the time.
>> Not only 'not like the price', 'havent got the money'.
>> Hercules! For me, a whole new line of research, maybe later.
>> MF not MS, sorry.
>> Pete, thanks for the history.
>> Bill Klein asked for more explanation so ..
>>
>> Bill,
>> Am retired so have no EMPLOYER and cost is a serious factor especially
>> for a project that today might be dubious saleability.
>>
>> Until a year ago I had an old IBM compiler (VA Cobol V2.2) that runs
>> on an old laptop under Windows NT plus DB2 V7.2, CICS for Windows 3.1
>> and VSAM KSDS via Pervasive's bTrieve, all 1990's vintage. On this
>> laptop I'm developing a software package written in batch Cobol that
>> generates Cobol/CICS programs (dinosaurial as it may seem, have gone
>> too far to stop). The package is aimed at any platform that runs CICS,
>> especially these days it seems, z/OS.
>>
>> So the V2.2 compiler I have performs two functions, a) compile/produce
>> executables of the batch pgms of my software, b) compile/produce
>> executables for the online Cobol/CICS pgms that my software generates.
>>
>> The old NT laptop grew old, slow and full so I bought a new one. It
>> won't accept NT so I opted for Windows XP. My CICS and DB2 work fine
>> thereon. The Cobol fails horribly and no fixes available.
>>
>> Today the XP laptop has NT running under Microsoft's Virtual PC thus
>> some of my development can continue on the NT side.
>>
>> But the ultimate intent is to email pgms between myself and clients.
>> Technically this must be done on the XP side while compilations etc
>> must be done on the NT side - is labour intensive and 'almost'
>> impractical.
>>
>> Thus the need for a free/cheap XP Cobol compiler that accepts CICS and
>> DB2 commands and produces working executables - in essence goodbye NT.
>>
>> As you said mainframe emulators are expensive (unless my government
>> will give me a grant :-000)))(still choice 1), PWD might be amenable
>> (choice 2), a Cobol compiler NT to XP fix was available (choice 3),
>> whatelse?.
>>
>> So In contacting the group, I am really looking at the 'whatelse'
>> scenario. Hope that better explains my situation.
>> Any help appreciated. Thanks
>> Graham
>
>
>How about using MS Virtual PC 2007 or VMware etc and running NT uder
that?
>
>See: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2099563,00.asp

>
Charles
I do exactly that right now via Virtual PC but my 'project' is too
severely handicapped to continue this way. My NT CICS is 10 years old
and doesn't have the CICS Web features, CTG, etc I will eventually
need.
Cheers
Graham
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com
**