Mail Archives: cygwin/1998/06/08/22:51:43
vtailor AT gte DOT net wrote:
[defending the statement, "Why do people still use Fortran ?"]
> As the former editor of ACM SIGPLAN (Special Interest Group on Programming
> Languages) Notices, I have a license to make such comments. Since you
> identify yourself as a `Dr.' in the Dept. of theoretical chemistry
> defending the use of a standard from 1977 as though it were academically
> respectible, you should also take care making unprofessional statements on
> a public forum. It might be bad for your career.
Hmph. Given your background then, I would have thought you would be
familiar with the following points:
1) Theoretical chemists are, presumably, interested in theoretical
chemistry, not in re-writing Fortran code into C.
2) Fortran has evolved since 1977 - your argument is equivalent to
deprecating the use of C as a language of 1978 (date of first publication
of K&R).
3) From a technical perspective, the choice of language is irrelevant.
Each have their pros and cons, but essentially Fortran, C, PASCAL et. al.
all do the same job.
4) Given that this is a public forum, it stands to reason that there are
many people here with many different requirements. The idea that everyone
should use C at all times is preposterous.
5) There are significant amounts of Fortran code out there, which works -
especially in academic circles other than computer science and also in the
real world. Are you suggesting it should all be re-written in C just for
the sake of it? Do you really think that would be a good career move?
Kev.
--
Kevin F. Quinn
Email: mailto:kevq AT banana DOT demon DOT co DOT uk
Web: http://www.banana.demon.co.uk/
DH/DSS PGP Key ID BF2270F3, F'print CF8E7A81E372B57AA793 2AC7E016EB00BF2270F3
RSA PGP Key ID 22DEFDE5, F'print 92DB91B153F10711 4272B2940D7C7D77
-
For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to
"gnu-win32-request AT cygnus DOT com" with one line of text: "help".
- Raw text -