Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!gatech!prism!gt4512c From: gt4512c@prism.gatech.EDU (BRADBERRY,JOHN L) Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran Subject: Re: f2c experiences? (really C vs fortran strings) Message-ID: <17599@hydra.gatech.EDU> Date: 27 Nov 90 12:00:22 GMT References: <1990Nov25.204354.12324@ariel.unm.edu> <28393@usc> <16414@cgl.ucsf.EDU> <4381@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au> Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology Lines: 32 In article 4305 (Richard A. O'Keefe ) writes: >> I think the most persistent myth in all of computing is the superiority >> of C over fortran for string handling. > >I'll challenge that. I reckon the most persistent myth is that string >handling is a good thing. Structured information should be stored as >trees &c, not as strings. Once again, I find it rather amusing that some of us insist on 're-defining the job' instead of taking an honest look at the tools available! In many cases, structured representation of data is indeed a great way to solve problems. However, I wouldn't declare it an 'all encompassing' solution just as a carpenter wouldn't build a house with just a hammer and saw! > >I can, however, testify that it took me five days to do in C (two weeks >after I started using C) to do what it had taken a friend five months >to do with PL/I (Fortran character variables are a restriction of PL/I). >How come? Because C *hasn't* got strings, but *has* got the tools you >need to build what you want. Strings are the (tar) pits. > 5 days versus 150 days for solving the same problem! Hmmmm... Perhaps your friend should find another line of work or MENSA SHOULD recruit YOU! -- John L. Bradberry |Georgia Tech Research Inst|uucp:..!prism!gt4512c Scientific Concepts Inc. |Microwaves and Antenna Lab|Int : gt4512c@prism 2359 Windy Hill Rd. 201-J|404 528-5325 (GTRI) |GTRI:jbrad@msd.gatech. Marietta, Ga. 30067 |404 438-4181 (SCI) |'...is this thing on..?'