Xref: utzoo comp.lang.fortran:4144 comp.lang.c:34239
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!src.honeywell.com!msi.umn.edu!cs.umn.edu!uc!uf!olstad
From: olstad@uf.msc.umn.edu (Ken Olstad)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran,comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Fortran vs. C for numerical work
Keywords: quote, year 2000
Message-ID: <3017@uc.msc.umn.edu>
Date: 27 Nov 90 00:14:07 GMT
References: <BGLENDEN.90Nov21003342@mandrill.cv.nrao.edu> <21884@orstcs.CS.ORST.EDU> <1990Nov21.220816.15220@rice.edu> <17290@netcom.UUCP> <WVENABLE.90Nov22231705@spam.ua.oz.au>
Sender: news@uc.msc.umn.edu
Reply-To: olstad@msc.edu (Ken Olstad)
Organization: Minnesota Supercomputer Center, Minneapolis, MN
Lines: 17

paco@rice.edu (Paul Havlak) writes:
>   To paraphrase Jack Schwartz: 
>   "We don't know what the numerical programming language of the year 2000
>   will be called, but it will look like Fortran."
>

wvenable@spam.ua.oz.au (Bill Venables) writes:
>
> "We don't know what the numerical programming language of the year 2000
>  will look like, but it will be called Fortran."
>

I've always heard it closer to the latter, but attributed to Seymour
Cray.  Does anybody here really know where this came from?

-Ken
olstad@msc.edu