Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Monday September 16 2019, @01:48PM   Printer-friendly
from the COBOL-is-often-fractionally-better dept.

https://medium.com/@bellmar/is-cobol-holding-you-hostage-with-math-5498c0eb428b

Face it: nobody likes fractions, not even computers.

When we talk about COBOL the first question on everyone's mind is always Why are we still using it in so many critical places? Banks are still running COBOL, close to 7% of the GDP is dependent on COBOL in the form of payments from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, The IRS famously still uses COBOL, airlines still use COBOL (Adam Fletcher dropped my favorite fun fact on this topic in his Systems We Love talk: the reservation number on your ticket used to be just a pointer), lots of critical infrastructure both in the private and public sector still runs on COBOL.

Why?

The traditional answer is deeply cynical. Organizations are lazy, incompetent, stupid. They are cheap: unwilling to invest the money needed upfront to rewrite the whole system in something modern. Overall we assume that the reason so much of civil society runs on COBOL is a combination of inertia and shortsightedness. And certainly there is a little truth there. Rewriting a mass of spaghetti code is no small task. It is expensive. It is difficult. And if the existing software seems to be working fine there might be little incentive to invest in the project.

But back when I was working with the IRS the old COBOL developers used to tell me: "We tried to rewrite the code in Java and Java couldn't do the calculations right."

[Ed note: The referenced article is extremely readable and clearly explains the differences between floating-point and fixed-point math, as well as providing an example and explanation that clearly shows the tradeoffs.]


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1) by jurov on Tuesday September 17 2019, @12:01AM (2 children)

    by jurov (6250) on Tuesday September 17 2019, @12:01AM (#894897)

    We are not talking about general solutions for everything.

    We are talking about money amounts and explicit rounding. With scaled integers, you can sit down with the formula and determine the required precision beforehand, only basic arithmetic understanding is required.

    Say you need to apply some % discount. Well then, with scaled integers: multiply the price by (100 - discount), then if you want rounding up, add 1 and lastly, divide by 100 to get discounted price (assuming integer division rounds down).

    With floating point numbers it is altogether unclear if we can rely on this approach. That's the point of this article and whole discussion.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @01:23AM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 17 2019, @01:23AM (#894935)

    Or you just use a language with full support for decimal arithmetic and happily and quickly get on with writing the REST of your program, secure in the knowledge that basic arithmetic will be correct. There is no excuse to do it any other way unless you are writing embedded systems code for an 8 bit processor or Wall Street high frequency transaction systems. Stop writing brittle code!

    • (Score: 2) by theluggage on Tuesday September 17 2019, @10:40AM

      by theluggage (1797) on Tuesday September 17 2019, @10:40AM (#895093)

      Or you just use a language with full support for decimal arithmetic and happily and quickly get on with writing the REST of your program, secure in the knowledge that basic arithmetic will be correct.

      Well, that includes just about every serious language in use today - if decimal math isn't built into the language (Java, Python), there will be a library (C/C++). So it is certainly not an excuse for sticking with COBOL.

      Stop writing brittle code!

      It is code that ignores appropriate precision that is brittle. If your algorithm would - in binary - magnify the difference between 0.1 and 0.09999999999999012964 into a significant bottom line error, then it may well do the same - in decimal - with the different between 1/6 and 0.166666666666666667, let alone the +/- 0.005 margin of error in every input value rounded to the nearest cent.