Re: [open-cobol-list] Re: [Cobolforgcc-devel] COBOL utilities project(was: open-cobol-0.9.6)

[Tim J. <te...@me...>]

"David A. Cobb" wrote:

> Isn't DB (Berkeley, IIRC) rather overkill? ...
> David A. Cobb, Software Engineer, Public Access Advocate

Possibly. I knew I shouldn't have expressed a view. In general I would be
happy to use it as long as the surplus function does not get in the way. 

I work as a software architect. We have this problem all the time. A package
has at the same time more and less function that we need. 

If we can
- add the missing bits without too much angst AND
- ignore the surplus (often this is not easy)
then we will use it.

The question is, can you do better by starting from scratch? Others would have
the basis for a more informed view than I would.

Ignoring other issues from the commercial world such as vendor viability which
are not such an issue with free software. If Rildo goes bust Tiny COBOL will
live.

Tim Josling