Re: Thoughts on MF COBOL, Unix, and RDBMS

"William M. Klein" <wmklein@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:%3vTj.194703$i_6.7323@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Some comments on Micro Focus compilers, SQL, Unix, et al
>
> At the time that Micro Focus had 3 products for DOS-OS/2
>  - Compiler
>  - Toolset
> - Workbench
>
> Micro Focus sold 2 products for Unix
>  - Compiler
> - Toolbox
>
> Micro Focus sold (for Windows-OS/2) a SEPARATE  "XDB" product which was 
> their first "SQL" product (and was definitely a DB2 emulator).  Later 
> products included "built-in" SQL preprocessors (including PRO*COBOL at
one 
> stage - as an option).
>
> For as long as I can remember (since at least late 80's), Micro Focus
has 
> supported the "preprocessor" directive on all platforms.  For each of
the 
> platforms that I remember, there were "add-on" SQL products. 
"Integrated" 
> SQL support (that was not an add-on product) was a "medium-late"
addition 
> from Micro Focus (late '90s, I would guess).
>
> As far as "rebadged" products go,  "COBOL/2" (compiler only, and ASCII
not 
> EBCDIC support) was a product available from either IBM or Micro Focus. 
> (It was "crippled" to NOT have EBCDIC support - or even '85 Standard 
> support when you bought the IBM version.).  This was during the days
when 
> Microsoft and IBM were still cooperating on OS/2.  This product had 
> support for an "MS" dialect that did emulate a much earlier Microsoft 
> developed/sold COBOL product.
>
> The actual Microsoft "rebadged" COBOL product - that worked with the 
> Microsoft pwd (???) was "mostly" equivalent to COBOL 3.x from Micro 
> Focus - but was (again) a crippled product that didn't do every thing
that 
> the IBM or Micro Focus products did, but WAS integrated into the
Microsoft 
> product line.
>
>   * * *
>
> Bottom-Line (related to the ORIGINAL issues), I know of NO version of a 
> Micro Focus product (from the late '80s on) that did not "work with"
SQL, 
> but up thru Server Express,(when talking about Unix)  I would expect
that 
> you would need to purchase the correct "add-on" SQL product and use the 
> Micro Focus "preprocessor" directive to get it to work on Unix.
>
> Also, related to the original question, whether C-ISAM was used or not
was 
> ALWAYS a "directive" question.  For the Unix products, the
"file-handler" 
> was always provided in a manner that could be changed by the user. 
> Although it is for a MUCH later Unix product, if you want to know about 
> selecting C-ISAM vs other file systems, check out:
>
>
http://supportline.microfocus.com/Documentation/books/sx50ws03/sx50indx.htm
>
> then look at
>  "compiler directives"
> and look for
>  "FILETYPE "
> where value "1" is C-ISAM, but many other types are available.
>
> -- 
> Bill Klein
> wmklein <at> ix.netcom.com

Thanks very much, Bill.

As usual, you are a mine of helpful information.

I think these folks just don't know too much about COBOL and compilers and

the "finer points" may be lost. Anyway, from recent posts here (including 
yours) I have all the information I could want at this stage and I'm
fairly 
confident we can solve this.

Tahnks again,

Pete.
-- 
"I used to write COBOL...now I can do anything."
>