Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ncar!unmvax!brainerd From: brainerd@unmvax.unm.edu (Walt Brainerd) Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran Subject: Re: Two Fortran Standards Message-ID: <370@unmvax.unm.edu> Date: 8 Sep 89 15:47:56 GMT References: <314@unmvax.unm.edu> <13833@megaron.arizona.edu> Organization: University of New Mexico at Albuquerque Lines: 31 In article <13833@megaron.arizona.edu>, mike@arizona.edu (Mike Coffin) writes: > From article <314@unmvax.unm.edu>, by brainerd@unmvax.unm.edu (Walt Brainerd): > > > ...In its current state, computer science departments avoid teaching > > Fortran, preferring C or Pascal. In fact, use of Fortran is > > intentionally and vigorously discouraged as its an ``ancient'' and > > ``obsolete'' language. ... The 8X proposal addresses and > > eliminates almost all grounds for the complaints of the computer > > science priesthood. They might even be willing to teach 8X rather > > than trying to assure the extinction of Fortran. > > How so? I'm not a member of the priesthood, but from what I've seen > of the new standard, it's about the last language I would try to teach > to a bunch of undergraduates. The movement in Computer Science seems I dont think I wrote the above, but that is OK, because I have no serious disagreement with it. It seems to me that teaching the "modern" subset of Fortran 8x would not be so bad. There would be the additional advantage that the students would be learning a language actually used. But I have never thought the particular language chosen to teach CS is all that important. After learning Pascal, a good student should be able to write C or Fortran programs after a weekend of study. I hope that engineering and science departments will continue to expose students to Fortran; now there will not be the excuse to avoid teaching them how to effectively use data structures, recursion, modules, etc. -- Walt Brainerd Unicomp, Inc. brainerd@unmvax.cs.unm.edu 2002 Quail Run Dr. NE Albuquerque, NM 87122 505/275-0800