Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!usc!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!apple!agate!ucbvax!threel.co.uk!jf
From: jf@threel.co.uk (John Fisher)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran
Subject: C vs. Fortran
Message-ID: <276765ee@ThreeL.co.uk>
Date: 13 Dec 90 11:28:46 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Lines: 28

ttw@lanl.gov (Tony Warnock) remarks, in an aside:

>     [...] (A biologist, I do not remember who, posted 1000 x 1000 x
>     1000 x 1000 x 50 which led to a lot of irrevelant discussion about
>     the lack of such memory sizes.) [...]

The reason I posted is such terms is that he claimed that this was a *typical*
array size.  It obviously isn't.

The discussion seems to me to get bogged down in two rather laughable
attitudes:

-- The macho-macho Fortran "you guys don't understand the real world"
   stance exemplified by the 50 trillion element array man.
-- The "preserve the purity of the truth" C people, like the person who,
   when asked for an introduction to C for engineers, simply replied that
   engineering problems wouldn't provide a complete understanding of
   C's facilities.

I take it for granted that both these languages have their merits, or they
wouldn't exist.  Professional programmers should consider it a matter of
pride to be fluent in a variety of languages, and use them as appropriate. 
People who are not principly programmers should use whatever language they
feel comfortable with, and if this stops them from doing what they want and
they can't find the time to extend their computer expertise, they should
call in a professional. 

--John Fisher