Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site mmintl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!cmcl2!philabs!pwa-b!mmintl!franka
From: franka@mmintl.UUCP (Frank Adams)
Newsgroups: net.lang
Subject: Re: What language do you use for scientific programming?
Message-ID: <630@mmintl.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 30-Aug-85 23:27:04 EDT
Article-I.D.: mmintl.630
Posted: Fri Aug 30 23:27:04 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 4-Sep-85 05:29:47 EDT
References: <909@oddjob.UUCP> <64500002@hpislb.UUCP>
Reply-To: franka@mmintl.UUCP (Frank Adams)
Organization: Multimate International, E. Hartford, CT
Lines: 11
Summary: Ada has a different kind of portability problem



This is in response to an article recommending Ada for scientific
programming.  The author stated that because Ada is rigidly standardized,
there is no portability problem.  Unfortunately, this only addresses half
of the problem.  The other half is having a compiler exist on the machine
you want to use.  Today, this is a real problem with Ada.  As time goes
on, it should become less of one.

There is one other problem that I know of with Ada, which is that many
of the compilers which do exist produce quite inefficient code.  Again,
this should improve with time.