Work Flow Language: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Revision as of 16:02, 25 November 2015 edit 143.116.250.125 (talk) Note of a better comparison ← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 22:39, 13 February 2025 edit undo Ourobosch (talk \| contribs) 89 edits Disagree with the suggestion to delete. Merging with the Burroughs Large Systems article is the better option in my opinion as WFL is a distinct enough language from JCL and was integral to a product line sold by a company of notable influence in the history of computing. This makes WFL, in my opinion, notable enough to at least include as a subsection in the aforementioned article. Tag: Manual revert
(6 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown)
Line 9: WFL was a compiled language on the medium systems. Because some OS interfaces may change from release to release, Medium Systems WFL code included a copy of the source in the object file. Upon executing a WFL job it would check to determine if the object was compatible with the OS version. If not it would trigger a recompile of the object using the source embedded in the object code. ~~Note: WFL is really more like DCL from Digital Equipment Corporation. Comparing it to JCL is like comparing Java to Assembler.~~ ==See also== *[[Burroughs large systems]] Line 20 ⟶ 19: [[Category:Burroughs mainframe computers]] [[Category:Scripting languages]] [[Category:Mainframe computer software]]