Comments for Add 1 to COBOL

Comment on ACCEPT fieldname FROM POST “fieldname”. by damonh

damonh — Fri, 03 Dec 2010 19:25:44 +0000

Well I am all for UDF’s but we are still awaiting on OC2. That’s the crux of the matter.
A lot of extra coding is going into getting around these issues when we could create the UDF’s required and make a library from them. So the burning question is…. where and when is OC2?

Comment on Aoirthoir by rkeane

rkeane — Tue, 23 Nov 2010 14:18:43 +0000

Below is a copy of the email I received in response to a request to change my password. when I follow the link it brings me to this page:”http://add1tocobol.com/wp-login.php?action=lostpassword&error=invalidkey” which already has this message:”Sorry, that key does not appear to be valid.” and is now asking for my Username or e-mail not for a new password.

Help, I’m stuck in a revolving door with no way in.

Regards,

Robert Keane

Someone has asked to reset the password for the following site and username.

http://add1tocobol.com/

Username: rkeane

To reset your password visit the following address, otherwise just ignore this email and nothing will happen.

http://add1tocobol.com/wp-login.php?action=rp&key=FgFNjAnrMJbBHYP7ZPUX&login=rkeane

Comment on OCWebEditor Project by aoirthoir

aoirthoir — Fri, 19 Nov 2010 05:02:44 +0000

HOLY OCEDTIOR BATMAN!

Damon, you’re about to convert me to an all web based IDE, and I don;t mean just for OC.

Praises!

Comment on OCKit Stages by aoirthoir

aoirthoir — Mon, 15 Nov 2010 21:29:08 +0000

Nerger, danke! We’d love to see and host your results at the site. Just let us know.

Comment on OCKit Stages by nerger

nerger — Fri, 12 Nov 2010 22:56:35 +0000

Yes… who works not on (better) OC editor. VI is nice, Browser Editor also, but I need an IDE (!) – and now I work on Eclipse port.

Comment on OCKit Stages by damonh

damonh — Fri, 12 Nov 2010 15:51:38 +0000

As Aoirthoir said I am currently working on a couple of proof of concepts. Both are going excellent.
1) Compiler web interface. You will be able to compile and test run your code from this interface. The prototype is finished and is working well.
2) OCEditor. I am currently working on an In Browser Editor for OpenCOBOL. Once completed the Compiler Web Interface will be integrated in for a robust OC IDE where you will be able to edit, compile, and test your code online.

I will make a formal post when things are along far enough that you will actually be able to see it all working.

Please feel free to email me with any questions or pop into the chat room. I am there most usually during the week and most weekends.

Comment on ACCEPT fieldname FROM POST “fieldname”. by aoirthoir

aoirthoir — Fri, 12 Nov 2010 07:13:02 +0000

William posted on OCO and this is my response…

[quote]
wmklein wrote:
It seems to me that rather than this extension, what you may want to look at is the two existing XML support features

1) The ISO TR on this. (Micro Focus already supports something similar to this) See:
[url=http://www.cobolstandard.info/j4/files/07-0005.doc]http://www.cobolstandard.info/j4/files/07-0005.doc[/url]

2) The IBM “XML GNERATE/PARSE” statements, see;

[url=http://publibfp.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr/BOOKS/IGY3PG50/5.1 ]http://publibfp.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr/BOOKS/IGY3PG50/5.1 [/url]

* * * *

I know that getting HTML input is NOT the same thing as parging/generating XML, but I think the similarities are such that using one of these two featurs could be extended to do what you are thinking about[/quote]

I would have to dig into them a bit to see. However, the way XML day is formatted is fairly different from what we get in a query_string (for gets) or READ FROM KEYBOARD (for posts).

The pattern in each of these is:

var=someval&var2=someval&var3=someval etc. Of course some val could have values that need to be decoded using a URL-DECODE functionality. Basically replacing %## with its hex equivalent (I think). Thus %20 is a space.

Now this can be done already natively with OpenCOBOL fairly easily. A few unstrings, SUBSTITUTES. Jim Currey’s method of doing it is fairly nice, just a CALL. And that certainly works.

I am proposing this idea because really a post or a get is nothing more than an accept. Utilizing this methodology would bring OpenCOBOL more in line with other languages. It would also add more to “native” web capability. ACCEPT VAR FROM POST “var” seems really intuitive to me as well. It’s just natural. If someone wanted to make it more clear it could be FROM HTML-FORM-POST or WEB-POST or something. But I’ve a feeling that POST/GET would be just fine (would need to support both).

It might be interesting to allow User Defined ACCEPTS. Then the functionality could be entirely coded in OpenCOBOL.

Comment on OpenCOBOL on the web by damonh

damonh — Thu, 11 Nov 2010 22:51:28 +0000

Well you’ve fixed the isam issue sort of on DH with vbisam, but we do need to get it working with BDB since vbisam may have some issues with it according to btiffin.

Comment on ACCEPT fieldname FROM POST “fieldname”. by damonh

damonh — Thu, 11 Nov 2010 22:49:53 +0000

I guess I need to keep working on that json utility then. sigh.
Anyway OC 2.0 will make these sort of things much more meaningful and do-able. WHERE IS MY OC2!!!!???

Comment on ACCEPT fieldname FROM POST “fieldname”. by jcurrey

jcurrey — Thu, 11 Nov 2010 22:35:41 +0000

Aoirthoir, my inclination would be to prefer to use user defined functions.

The compiler would remain standard that way.

All of our work with CGIgnite is in COBOL, so we know that our clever developer community could write the functionality you want without resorting to bringing in another language.

We are not opposed to JS or other languages, but would prefer to stay away from add-ons when OpenCOBOL can do the job.

Either way, I think your idea is a great one!