Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!rex!ames!apple!agate!shelby!csli!poser From: poser@csli.Stanford.EDU (Bill Poser) Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc Subject: Re: Fortran vs. C for numerical work - expression notation Message-ID: <16799@csli.Stanford.EDU> Date: 9 Dec 90 02:56:19 GMT References: <16798@csli.Stanford.EDU> <8339@lanl.gov> Reply-To: poser@csli.stanford.edu (Bill Poser) Organization: Center for the Study of Language and Information, Stanford U. Lines: 35 Jim, I hardly came to the "religious defence of C". Rather, I asked that you give evidence of your claim that Fortran's mathematical notation is substantially closer to that used in mathematics than C's, since this had been explicitly discussed. As it turns out, you don't really examples different from those already mentioned, but apparently you think that they are more significant. On this, two comments. First, I don't really accept the claim that C is further from math than Fortran because it uses, e.g. & for logical and. If, as you suggest, we were to use /\, we'd still have a different symbol, one that looks sort of like the mathematical one, but not quite, and that doesn't type as a single symbol. Second, my experience has been that people who study mathematics at all seriously, both pure and applied, are comfortable with a wide variety of notations. Look at physics, for example, and the bewildering variety of subscript and superscript notation you find, and tensor notation, etc. It is very difficult for me to believe that the difference between infix and prefix power functions and the like can make much of a difference to anyone doing serious mathematical computation. Is there any evidence that it actually matters? Regarding Piercarlo Grandi's argument that programming notation should differ as much as possible from mathematical notation, I am not terribly sympathetic. I suspect that this will just make people spend their time learning the funny new notation, not make them think harder about how actual digital computation differs from symbolic or ideal continuous numerical computation. He could be right, but I wouldn't bet on it. So, no, I'm not advocating gratuitious differences, just suggesting: (a) that Fortran and C are not very different in this respect; (b) that these differences probably don't matter very much. Bill