Recent changes to bugs

$PREFIXDIR/bin/htcobol missing on 0.64

Glen Barber — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 23:20:48 -0000

Hopefully this is the correct place to report this bug. I am the current tinycobol port maintainer for FreeBSD, and recently, tinycobol fails test builds and package removal because of the bin/htcobol binary missing during install.

Right now, I have that line removed from the necessary pkg-plist file, but without the binary, compiling COBOL applications is now impossible.

Hopefully this is not a bug and I am simply missing something.

comment line

Anonymous — Mon, 30 Oct 2006 15:28:27 -0000

I'm getting an error when I use FIXED (old style) COBOL
format. If I put a "*" on column 7 it's been considered
as a continuation line and not a comment:

IDENTIFICATION DIVISION.
PROGRAM-ID. HELLO.
* considered as a continuation line
PROCEDURE DIVISION.
DISPLAY "Hello, world!"
STOP RUN.

$ htcobol hello.cob
hello.cob: 3: error: syntax error, on or before '*'

Parser problem in special-names section

Anonymous — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 16:47:41 -0000

Missing final '.' error
...
...
CONFIGURATION SECTION.
SPECIAL-NAMES.
decimal-point is comma
* INPUT-OUTPUT SECTION.
* FILE-CONTROL.
...
...

*
*htcobol debugging output
*
htcobol -c -P -I../copybooks -I. teste.cob
SCAN( 0):NEW FILE/LINE : teste.cob,0
SCAN( 1): <reserved>: IDENTIFICATION
SCAN( 1): <reserved>: DIVISION
SCAN( 2):<PERIOD_TOK>:
SCAN( 2): <reserved>: PROGRAM-ID
SCAN( 2):<PERIOD_TOK>:
SCAN( 2):-> IDENT_ST
SCAN( 2): <IDSTRING>: TEST00
SCAN( 2):-> INITIAL
SCAN( 3):<PERIOD_TOK>:
SCAN( 3): <reserved>: ENVIRONMENT
SCAN( 3): <reserved>: DIVISION
SCAN( 5):<PERIOD_TOK>:
SCAN( 5):-> ENVIR_ST
SCAN( 5): <reserved>: CONFIGURATION
SCAN( 5): <reserved>: SECTION
SCAN( 6):<PERIOD_TOK>:
SCAN( 6): <reserved>: SPECIAL-NAMES
SCAN( 7):<PERIOD_TOK>:
SCAN( 7): <reserved>: decimal-point
SCAN( 7): <reserved>: is
SCAN( 7): <reserved>: comma
SCAN( 11): <reserved>: DATA

and the program never returns...

Problem with INDEXED file under ACCESS DYNAMIC

Anonymous — Fri, 24 Mar 2006 21:52:34 -0000

When a file is declared to be INDEXED and its ACCESS IS
DYNAMIC, TC does not seem to allow the writing to the
file unless the file already exists. The code below
demonstrates this (this program works fine under Micro
Focus Personal Cobol though)

IDENTIFICATION DIVISION.
PROGRAM-ID. abc.

ENVIRONMENT DIVISION.
INPUT-OUTPUT SECTION.
FILE-CONTROL.
SELECT myFile ASSIGN TO 'abc.txt'
ORGANIZATION IS INDEXED
ACCESS IS DYNAMIC
RECORD KEY IS one.

DATA DIVISION.
FILE SECTION.
FD myFile.
01 rc-data.
05 one PIC X.
05 two PIC X.

WORKING-STORAGE SECTION.
01 where PIC X.

PROCEDURE DIVISION.

* create empty file, otherwise doesn't work
* OPEN OUTPUT myFile
* CLOSE myFile

OPEN I-O myFile

WRITE rc-data FROM 'a7'
WRITE rc-data FROM 'b8'
WRITE rc-data FROM 'c9'
INVALID KEY DISPLAY '!'
END-WRITE

MOVE '#!' TO rc-data
MOVE 'a' TO one
START myFile KEY > one
INVALID KEY DISPLAY 'key fail'
END-START

READ myFile NEXT RECORD
AT END DISPLAY 'eof'
END-READ
DISPLAY 'rec=' rc-data

CLOSE myFile

STOP RUN.

Problem in merging files using sort command

Anonymous — Wed, 19 Oct 2005 09:26:14 -0000

I have installed tinycobol in my PC and trying to run
the program of Merging two files . I am getting the
error in the following manner.
*** glibc detected *** ./3Merge: double free or
corruption (out): 0x0959e018 ***
======= Backtrace: =========
/lib/libc.so.6[0x364424]
/lib/libc.so.6(__libc_free+0x77)[0x36495f]
./3Merge[0x804e133]
./3Merge[0x8048f50]
/lib/libc.so.6(__libc_start_main+0xc6)[0x315de6]
./3Merge[0x8048db1]
======= Memory map: ========
00111000-00112000 rwxp 00111000 00:00 0
00112000-001fd000 r-xp 00000000 fd:00
3423842 /lib/tls/i686/libdb-4.3.so
001fd000-00200000 rwxp 000ea000 fd:00
3423842 /lib/tls/i686/libdb-4.3.so
00200000-00201000 rwxp 00200000 00:00 0
002e3000-002fd000 r-xp 00000000 fd:00
1468613 /lib/ld-2.3.5.so
002fd000-002fe000 r-xp 00019000 fd:00
1468613 /lib/ld-2.3.5.so
002fe000-002ff000 rwxp 0001a000 fd:00
1468613 /lib/ld-2.3.5.so
00301000-00425000 r-xp 00000000 fd:00
1468638 /lib/libc-2.3.5.so
00425000-00427000 r-xp 00124000 fd:00
1468638 /lib/libc-2.3.5.so
00427000-00429000 rwxp 00126000 fd:00
1468638 /lib/libc-2.3.5.so
00429000-0042b000 rwxp 00429000 00:00 0
0042d000-0044f000 r-xp 00000000 fd:00
3945571 /lib/libm-2.3.5.so
0044f000-00450000 r-xp 00021000 fd:00
3945571 /lib/libm-2.3.5.so
00450000-00451000 rwxp 00022000 fd:00
3945571 /lib/libm-2.3.5.so
00453000-00455000 r-xp 00000000 fd:00
3945570 /lib/libdl-2.3.5.so
00455000-00456000 r-xp 00001000 fd:00
3945570 /lib/libdl-2.3.5.so
00456000-00457000 rwxp 00002000 fd:00
3945570 /lib/libdl-2.3.5.so
00624000-00632000 r-xp 00000000 fd:00
3945569 /lib/libpthread-2.3.5.so
00632000-00633000 r-xp 0000d000 fd:00
3945569 /lib/libpthread-2.3.5.so
00633000-00634000 rwxp 0000e000 fd:00
3945569 /lib/libpthread-2.3.5.so
00634000-00636000 rwxp 00634000 00:00 0
00840000-00841000 r-xp 00840000 00:00 0
008db000-008dc000 rwxp 008db000 00:00 0
00d7d000-00d86000 r-xp 00000000 fd:00
3945572 /lib/libgcc_s-4.0.0-20050520.so.1
00d86000-00d87000 rwxp 00009000 fd:00
3945572 /lib/libgcc_s-4.0.0-20050520.so.1
08048000-08058000 r-xp 00000000 fd:00
2347822 /home/sneha/Cobol/4SortingandMerging/3Merge
08058000-08059000 rwxp 00010000 fd:00
2347822 /home/sneha/Cobol/4SortingandMerging/3Merge
08059000-0805b000 rwxp 08059000 00:00 0
09598000-095b9000 rwxp 09598000 00:00 0 [heap]
b7e00000-b7e21000 rwxp b7e00000 00:00 0
b7e21000-b7f00000 --xp b7e21000 00:00 0
bfaaf000-bfac4000 rwxp bfaaf000 00:00 0
[stack]
Aborted
What is this error ? i am not getting . Please help me
out.
Regards
Sneha Revankar

Nested Performs

Koen Serry — Wed, 09 Mar 2005 06:59:36 -0000

Hi, I'm pretty new to cobol, but as I was showing this
compiler to a collegue of mine we encountered an error
while compiling one of her test programs.

This is the code, if you try to compile it, it'll fail
with some strange error (.P12) or something. If you
move the inner "perform with test after" block into
some procedure all compiles well. Is it possible that
these anonymous blocks aren't given a name into the
assembler code, or am I talking nonsense ?

PERFORM WITH TEST AFTER
UNTIL I-MUNTCODE = "END"
DISPLAY "Geef de volgende muntcode (XXX) : "
ACCEPT I-MUNTCODE
IF I-MUNTCODE NOT = "END"
MOVE 0 TO WS-KOERS-TELLER
PERFORM LEES-KOERS 5 TIMES
DISPLAY OUT-TITEL
PERFORM WITH TEST AFTER
UNTIL GEEN-VOLGENDE-AANKOOPPRIJS
DISPLAY "Is er een volgende
aankoopprijs (J/N) : "
ACCEPT I-VOLGENDE-AANKOOPPRIJS
IF VOLGENDE-AANKOOPPRIJS
DISPLAY "Geef de volgende
aankoopprijs (999) : "
ACCEPT I-AANKOOPPRIJS
MOVE I-AANKOOPPRIJS TO
R-AANKOOPPRIJS
PERFORM TOON-RESULTAAT
END-IF
END-PERFORM
END-IF
END-PERFORM.

Bug in tcob_sort_giving in fileio.c

Steven E. Kalbach — Mon, 13 Dec 2004 19:15:14 -0000

The malloc of rec in the routine tcob_sort_giving in
fileio.c should be:

rec = (char **) malloc(sizeof(char*) * (file_num + 1));

instead of:

rec = (char **) malloc(sizeof(char*) * file_num);

The bug results in a zero size rec pointer array being
allocated when there is just one file.

I have attached a corrected version; however, I did not
document the correction.

This was compile on an OpenBSD 3.6 I386 system.

Thank You and Best Regards,

Steven E. Kalbach

Strange sign problem

Sunuraxi — Mon, 11 Oct 2004 11:29:31 -0000

Hello,

I have written a small COBOL program the write one
record to a file. The record contains signed and unsigned
items with default value (+/-) 1234 :

03 EXTERNAL-DECIMAL.

*------------------------------------------------------------
* EXTERNAL DECIMAL UNSIGNED
*------------------------------------------------------------
05 EXT-DEC-UNSIGNED PIC 9999 DISPLAY
VALUE 1234.

*------------------------------------------------------------
-----
* EXTERNAL DECIMAL SIGNED NEGATIVE
*------------------------------------------------------------
-----
05 EXT-DEC-SIGNED-NEGATIVE PIC S9999
DISPLAY
VALUE -1234.

*------------------------------------------------------------
-----
* EXTERNAL DECIMAL SIGNED POSITIVE
*------------------------------------------------------------
-----
05 EXT-DEC-SIGNED-POSITIVE PIC S9999
DISPLAY
VALUE +1234.

*------------------------------------------------------------
-----
* EXTERNAL DECIMAL LEADING SIGN NEGATIVE
*------------------------------------------------------------
-----
05 EXT-DEC-SIGN-LEADING-NEG PIC S9999
DISPLAY
SIGN LEADING
VALUE -1234.

*------------------------------------------------------------
-----
* EXTERNAL DECIMAL LEADING SIGN POSITIVE
*------------------------------------------------------------
-----
05 EXT-DEC-SIGN-LEADING-POS PIC S9999
DISPLAY
SIGN LEADING
VALUE +1234.

*------------------------------------------------------------
-----
* EXTERNAL DECIMAL TRAILING SIGN NEGATIVE
*------------------------------------------------------------
-----
05 EXT-DEC-SIGN-TRAILING-NEG PIC S9999
DISPLAY
SIGN TRAILING
VALUE -1234.

*------------------------------------------------------------
-----
* EXTERNAL DECIMAL TRAILING SIGN POSITIVE
*------------------------------------------------------------
-----
05 EXT-DEC-SIGN-TRAILING-POS PIC S9999
DISPLAY
SIGN TRAILING
VALUE +1234.

*------------------------------------------------------------
-----
* EXTERNAL DECIMAL SEPARATE LEADING SIGN
NEGATIVE
*------------------------------------------------------------
-----
05 EXT-DEC-SIGN-SEP-LEAD-NEG PIC S9999
DISPLAY
SIGN LEADING SEPARATE
VALUE -1234.

*------------------------------------------------------------
-----
* EXTERNAL DECIMAL SEPARATE LEADING SIGN
POSITIVE
*------------------------------------------------------------
-----
05 EXT-DEC-SIGN-SEP-LEAD-POS PIC S9999
DISPLAY
SIGN LEADING SEPARATE
VALUE +1234.

*------------------------------------------------------------
-----
* EXTERNAL DECIMAL SEPARATE TRAILING SIGN
NEGATIVE
*------------------------------------------------------------
-----
05 EXT-DEC-SIGN-SEP-TRAIL-NEG PIC S9999
DISPLAY
SIGN TRAILING SEPARATE
VALUE -1234.

*------------------------------------------------------------
-----
* EXTERNAL DECIMAL SEPARATE TRAILING SIGN
POSITIVE
*------------------------------------------------------------
-----
05 EXT-DEC-SIGN-SEP-TRAIL-POS PIC S9999
DISPLAY
SIGN TRAILING SEPARATE
VALUE +1234.

*------------------------------------------------------------
-----
* BINARY UNSIGNED
*------------------------------------------------------------
-----
03 BINARIES.
05 BINARY-UNSIGNED PIC 9999 BINARY
VALUE 1234.

*------------------------------------------------------------
-----
* BINARY SIGNED POSITIVE
*------------------------------------------------------------
-----
05 BINARY-SIGNED-POSITIVE PIC S9999
BINARY
VALUE +1234.

*------------------------------------------------------------
-----
* BINARY SIGNED NEGATIVE
*------------------------------------------------------------
-----
05 BINARY-SIGNED-POSITIVE PIC S9999
BINARY
VALUE -1234.

*------------------------------------------------------------
-----
* PACKED-DECIMAL UNSIGNED
*------------------------------------------------------------
-----
03 INTERNAL-DECIMAL.
05 INT-DEC-UNSIGNED PIC 9999
PACKED-DECIMAL
VALUE 1234.

*------------------------------------------------------------
-----
* PACKED-DECIMAL SIGNED POSITIVE
*------------------------------------------------------------
-----
05 INT-DEC-SIGNED-POS PIC S9999
PACKED-DECIMAL
VALUE +1234.

*------------------------------------------------------------
-----
* PACKED-DECIMAL SIGNED NEGATIVE
*------------------------------------------------------------
-----
05 INT-DEC-SIGNED-NEG PIC S9999
PACKED-DECIMAL
VALUE -1234.

In the file, I get the expected binary data except for the
EXTERNAL DECIMAL items with negative value. Instead
of hex 31 32 33 44, I got hex 31 32 33 4D. And for the
leading sign, I got hex 4A 32 33 34 instead of hex 41 32
33 34. Could you help me ?

Thanks,

Sunuraxi

arithmetics broken

Johannes Berg — Mon, 09 Feb 2004 20:29:19 -0000

The attached program (simple linear congruence pseudo
random number generator) is supposed to generate
numbers in the range

0..(max-1)

However, it only generates items from
0..(max-1-[10% of max])

and then adds the remaining 10% of the numbers to the
first 10% of the items. You can observe this very
nicely by running

./RANDOM |sort|uniq -c

bugs in tinycobol

Anonymous — Thu, 31 Jul 2003 07:44:08 -0000

I am subbmitting some bugs in tinycobol. We are
working presently with micro focus cobol. But we wants
to adopt to tinycobol. We make some acid tests with
your tinycobol. We found some serious bugs in your
tinycobol. We already started converting our mf cobol
programmes
to tinycobol. in the middle we found the below bugs .
At present our work is stopped due the above problems.
please guide us to solve the above problems. and
successfully adopt to tinycobol. I am sending the bugs
as attachment. please verify the same.

Please verify the above problem and give me the reply
as early as possible.

d v g krishna

my mail address is vgkdinavahi@indiatimes.com