From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on ip-172-31-65-14.ec2.internal X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.4 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Path: eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.mixmin.net!news2.arglkargh.de!news.karotte.org!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Bill Findlay Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Java and Python have just discovered "record" type finally after 40 years. Date: Sun, 14 May 2023 13:46:41 +0100 Organization: none Message-ID: <0001HW.2A110FB10110801E70000936A38F@news.individual.net> References: Reply-To: findlaybill@blueyonder.co.uk Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: individual.net 8qFt0z6VTi4aXZgMNPXvuQi5ldORCMMvH8wQx0fOp81l87lGKl X-Orig-Path: not-for-mail Cancel-Lock: sha1:K1E4e8ziuBzyfdvGi28QLNIy3VU= User-Agent: Hogwasher/5.24 Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:65232 List-Id: On 14 May 2023, J-P. Rosen wrote (in article ): > Le 13/05/2023 à 18:53, Niklas Holsti a écrit: > > > What about COBOL and LISP? > > > > > > As I understand it (but I don't claim to be expert), the early COBOL > > languages could describe the structure of file records, and of > > working-storage objects, as nested sequences of components and > > sub-records, but each such description defined a _single_ "record" > > object, not a "record" data-type that could have many instances. So if > > you wanted to have two record objects with the same structure, you had > > to duplicate the whole record description. > AFAIR, COBOL didn't have types, but you could define a variable LIKE > another one. LIKE is PL/I. -- Bill Findlay