COBOL and luxury present in one English sentence is a syntax error.
If you never knew anything but COBOL you'd probably love programming it. Knowledge of better techniques can be seriously damaging to your career.
I suffered some damage from not wanting to touch Windows (3.1) after discovering Linux in the early 1990s. Today, most jobs advertisements still look toxic.
I can relate. At my workplace, I think I'm the only person on the whole site who uses Linux as their main OS in place of Windows. It has its obvious downsides, since company tools are designed to work on Windows and everything else is a bigger or smaller hack, but given my general comfort of working on top of Linux, I think I'm still better off feeling the pain of using a less supported but more comfortable OS.
As a Fortran and assembly language programmer, I developed a strong philosophical distaste of COBOL and the environment it thrived in. Then, my first consulting gig used RPG-III. Then, cobol was installed, and it was wonderful.
Per your own sentence, you've just committed a syntax error.
That's the problem with set of all sets, you never know when you commit hypocrisy. (;
Old timers being rained with hundreds of thousands each year to maintain legacy banking systems beg to differ
Just to clarify: that was a tongue in cheek comment. The cycle of language introduction, acceptance, toolchain maturity, obsolescence quickened up a LOT in the last 15-20 years. Many earlier languages, from ALGOL to Fortran would have given you a comfortably large set of jobs to choose from for over 20 years.