←back to thread

127 points Anon84 | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.211s | source
Show context
ufmace ◴[] No.38509082[source]
The article title is clickbaity, but the actual point is the proposal of using LLMs to translate large amounts of legacy COBOL systems to more modern languages like Java. Doesn't seem terribly useful to me. I expect you could get a 90% solution faster, but the whole challenge with these projects is how to get that last bit of correctness, and how to be confident enough in the correctness of it to actually use it in Production.

But then all of this has been known for decades. There are plenty of well-known techniques for how to do all that. If they haven't actually done it by now, it's a management problem, and no AI tech is going to fix that.

replies(11): >>38509198 #>>38509418 #>>38509802 #>>38509995 #>>38510231 #>>38510273 #>>38510431 #>>38511157 #>>38511186 #>>38512486 #>>38512716 #
matthewdgreen ◴[] No.38509198[source]
How hard is it to actually learn COBOL? It seems like a fairly simple language to pick up, but maybe the idiomatic COBOL used in these legacy systems is particularly nasty for some reason.
replies(5): >>38509221 #>>38509476 #>>38509483 #>>38510105 #>>38510187 #
the_only_law ◴[] No.38509221[source]
Learning COBOL is the easy part. My understanding is the hard part is becoming familiar with insanely expensive, proprietary mainframe platform that’s you’ll find in most COBOL work. I know IBM has some sort of self training material, but I’m not sure if it’s enough to go from zero to qualified. Most work I see in the area seems to want established domain experts, not hackers who learn just enough to be dangerous.
replies(3): >>38509507 #>>38511265 #>>38516948 #
1. briHass ◴[] No.38509507[source]
Not really much different from today: sure, you can 'learn' a new language in a few days, but you won't know the build tooling, deployment strategies, environment specifics, convention over config, and typical patterns/practices that will allow others to understand what you wrote.