Subject: RE: COBOL source evaluations
From: Wakser, David (David.Wakser@infocrossing.com)
Date: Tue Jul 08 2008 - 11:38:36 EDT
John: Yes, a VERY good idea - but because of the "politics" involved, having a "product" would reduce the quarreling; that way, applications could not say "we don't take direction from the systems people". So, a product would be best! David Wakser -----Original Message----- From: owner-vse-l@Lehigh.EDU [mailto:owner-vse-l@Lehigh.EDU] On Behalf Of John Mycroft Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2008 11:34 AM To: VSE Discussion List Subject: Re: COBOL source evaluations Can't point you at an automated tool to do it but I can assure you that the job can be well worth doing. I did it for a customer in NZ who was thinking of upgrading from a 4361 to a 4381 (this wasn't last week!) and changing less than a dozen lines in their data division of their longest running program avoided the upgrade. Their #1 sin was using DISPLAY for subscripts to make it easier to debug the not-infrequent dumps the program produced. John Mycroft Wakser, David wrote: > All: > > Is anyone aware of any products that will "read" COBOL source > programs and evaluate the performance-related items. For example: > point out inefficient numeric formats (e.g. DISPLAY fields instead of > COMP-3 or COMP), inefficient verbs (e.g. where SEARCH might be more > efficient that SEARCH), inefficient file access methods (e.g. opening > a file for I/O when it is only used to read), etc. etc. I have a > client that has thousands of programs, most with embedded "COPY" > statements of both WORKING-STORAGE entries and PROCEDURE DIVISION > code, who really needs help in this area. > > Does such an animal exist? > > David Wakser
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Tue Aug 19 2008 - 17:35:07 EDT