Join COBOL's Next Generation 276
jfruh writes "COBOL, it's finally becoming clear, isn't going away any time soon; there are far too many business-criticial applications written in it that work perfectly well for that to happen. This reality could be a career boon for IT staff. Need to learn the ins and outs of COBOL? Your employer may well pay for your training. Just getting started in IT? COBOL can provide a niche that gets you a first job."
Nothing does (Score:4, Interesting)
what COBOL does as well as COBOL does it.
Re:Nothing does (Score:4, Interesting)
If you mean solving business-related information technology problems in a concise and maintainable way, I think you're very, very wrong. COBOL is a horrible, wordy language. If you mean wearing out developer's keyboards, you are more correct. COBOL is too verbose to be easily legible. I'm of the opinion that there is an ideal level of information density when it comes to conveying the intent of a piece of software. At one end is assembly, and at the other is COBOL. neither are good. C approaches it from one end and probably something like Python from the other. Both are for more usable, maintable, and flexible languages.
I'm of the opinion that if you enjoy writing code in COBOL you either haven't used anything else or you're a masochist.
The reason it is still used is simple. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Nothing does (Score:4, Interesting)
It didn't have to be that way. When I was still in school a millennium ago and took my one and only COBOL course, I recall devising a pseudo-structured way of using the language that the instructor had never seen before, yet my code was no less capable than the more typical approach(es). It obviously caught him quite by surprise by his reaction, which I've never forgotten (I've forgotten every detail about my technique). Perhaps it made my code more modular and maintainable.
Another good point (Score:2, Interesting)
One of the reasons so much IT outsourcing in mainframe shops is happening is because new workers have little exposure to the mainframe culture. I work in an industry highly dependent on mainframes, but not directly with the technology. However, I do see the fundamental difference between mainframe systems work and Linux/Windows on Intel systems work. For someone who doesn't "get it," mainframes look completely inflexible and definitely a legacy technology. When you're talking about a system that still has references to things like punch cards compared to Windows Server 2012 running in VMWare, there's a huge mindset change. There is also a very strict change control process around everything, usually because messing up something on the mainframe knocks out the company's key business operations. (Example: RBS went offline for days because an (offshore) employee messed up a batch scheduling software upgrade and executed a wrong rollback procedure.)
That's why I think mainframes and COBOL get a bad rap -- they're ancient systems, but only because they work and they're at the core of the businesses that use them. And for the purpose, they're great. Mainframes are designed for maximum transaction throughput and reliability above all else, which is why most people don't use them as a generic computing platform. I'm a systems engineer primarily working on Windows installations, but I'm also flexible and cross-platform enough to understand Linux, UNIX and the other systems our stuff talks to. Because of this, I'm employed -- you wouldn't believe how little effort it takes to stand out in an environment of people who stick to the one system they know. Adding a tool to the tool set isn't a bad thing. I don't know everything about Linux or mainframes, but I can at least ask intelligent questions.
I can also see why people might shy away from learning COBOL, since the MO for most companies dealing with talent shortages is to offshore everything. However, I'm of the mindset that everything happens in cycles. My company is very much "trailing edge" when it comes to IT trends, and we're just starting to figure out that offshoring isn't the magic answer to software development problems. So, I think the trend is coming back around, just like these newfangled "virtual machines" on Intel processors. Wow, what a concept! Sci-fi type stuff! :-)
I'm considering this, actually (Score:2, Interesting)
I've got a pile of various degrees, none in CS, yet I keep ending up coding shit for a living. None of it is all that great - I'm a massive generalist and not a programmer. It's tempting to just get a good intro to COBOL and then dive into it for a career. It's one of those languages that doesn't change much and isn't about to get replaced with the newest and greatest.
After half of my career switching jobs every 3-4 years, I'm thinking about settling down. Compared to what I've had to code so far in life, COBOL doesn't look that bad.
Re:Nothing does (Score:5, Interesting)
It sure does!
On the other hand, I got out of COBOL programming after some ~12 years because the only thing COBOL does well is what COBOL has done thousands of times before.
It's a boring platform to develop for; very few interresting (from a technical perspective) projects ever come along.
Safe and secure life as a developer; yes. Actually enjoying your safety and security; no.
we need more (Score:3, Interesting)
At my work we're just starting a multimillion dollar project, mostly in COBOL, on a mainframe. And I'm not talking about modifying old code, we're developing a new system. So we'll need about 30 new COBOL programmers very soon. It's far from dead!
good career stability (Score:3, Interesting)