Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!noao!ncar!gatech!mcnc!uvaarpa!murdoch!astsun8.astro.Virginia.EDU!gl8f
From: gl8f@astsun8.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: Beyond Fortran vs. C for numerical work
Message-ID: <1990Dec5.073649.23504@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Date: 5 Dec 90 07:36:49 GMT
References: <1990Nov30.163613.9562@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca> <1980@mts.ucs.UAlberta.CA> <GW_7N17@xds13.ferranti.com>
Sender: news@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU
Organization: Department of Astronomy, University of Virginia
Lines: 14

In article <GW_7N17@xds13.ferranti.com> peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes:

>     a) I can write code quickly in this language.
>
>Fortran doesn't count here, beacause I spend too much time writing code
>to simulate facilities available in every other programming language
>since Basic and BCPL mutated out of effective existence. It's almost as
>easy to code some stuff in assembly as it is in Fortran.

Sounds like your problems aren't well-suited to Fortran. So you
shouldn't use it.

Perhaps by the end of the silly flames, people will realize that you
pick the right tool for the problem.


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com