http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/about/foi-administering-the-tv-licensing-system-part-1-AB19/

i updated tv licensing with my situation in august renewal time they sent me a non license so to speak they say they may do a visual check and then send a letter again in 2 yr time

but i askede many questions before i did there form for not paying and all came back as not needing a licence thoughg to be safe i told them yuers i have 3 freeview tvs but all 3 i have deleted all c hannels in them and taken off all cables

they said makes no differance as long as you dont watch anyting live then thats good enough for them

The real problem with COBOL is not it’s forgiving nature. It’s that it was designed in a time when only certain functionality was required. Since then, OOP and other constructs have been cobbled onto COBOL, but it’s only served to splinter to language. Those that tell the tale of how awesome COBOL is because now it has .Net don’t realize that most COBOL is run on platforms where .Net doesn’t exist. In the end, there is no portability. And, anything above mostly-rudimentary banking functions are beyond the scope of COBOL, regardless of the merits or talent of the programmer. I know because I am a COBOL programmer by trade and I constantly eek every last ounce of oomph out of COBOL; which makes for pretty unmaintainable code because my peer COBOL programmers are adding transaction a to balance b to get new balance c while I am parsing complex if-then-else logic to assign statuses to accounts. Yes, COBOL can do it, but it’s not easy and it’s very ugly!

But bad COBOL can be written just like bad can be written. Bad programmers are bad programmers, in any language.

Perl on the other hand can be extended in a multitude of ways on all platforms without becoming too gawdawful splintered. True, there are modules that are meant for a single platform and can’t be ported, but a great many Perl modules are written in Perl and can therefore be ported to any platform that can run Perl. I myself write all my modules in Perl just so that they are portable.

As a programmer by trade, I do have to take umbrage with the idea that programming languages should be suited to allowing software to be written by “novice” programmers. Programming is a profession to many, and just like other professions, there is a pride in being able to do it well. I for one believe that there is a blight on the programming world where HR departments feel that “an XYZ programmer is worth $x, period.” They don’t have the slightest clue that a GOOD programmer is generally 2-5 times as productive and causes far fewer issues than the n00b programmers (or those that got a degree or certificate and suddenly decide that they are, indeed, programmers). So, it is the “novice” programmers that cause issues, write unmaintainable code, do not understand the merits of error-handling, and then keep my salary down while I fix their mistakes.

In the end, most of us drive cars. But just because we drive our cars on public streets doesn’t mean we should be allowed on the Daytona track and get paid to do so. Likewise, an artist creates with his heart, mind, and brush. There shouldn’t be any merit in someone taking the “easy” road to creating a painting.

Leave the programming to the pros. If you (the royal “you”) want to be a weekend hacker, go for it. But don’t declare yourself a programmer if you can’t handle a slightly more complex language such as Perl.

Just to clarify, I found Perl very odd at first… but I stuck it out, put in my time, and taught myself. I now find that Perl is the very best language I’ve used… rapid development, terse syntax, infinitely expansible, and it’s never yet let me down.

Thanks,
-Mike