Xref: utzoo comp.misc:2197 comp.lang.fortran:589
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!rwwetmore
From: rwwetmore@watmath.waterloo.edu (Ross Wetmore)
Newsgroups: comp.misc,comp.lang.fortran
Subject: Re: FORTRAN Horror
Message-ID: <17946@watmath.waterloo.edu>
Date: 31 Mar 88 18:18:21 GMT
References: <1135@pembina.UUCP> <46500011@uxe.cso.uiuc.edu> <6630@ames.arpa> <21064@bu-cs.BU.EDU>
Reply-To: rwwetmore@watmath.waterloo.edu (Ross Wetmore)
Organization: U. of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 55

In article <21064@bu-cs.BU.EDU> bzs@bu-cs.BU.EDU (Barry Shein) writes:
>
>Ok, this is getting silly.
>
>There's one good reason to program in Fortran: The software subsystems
>you need to attach to are written in or designed to interface to Fortran.
  [ ... ]

  Not silly ... by a long shot !!!

  There are a lot of Fortran packages out there whose size and complexity 
makes the Unix kernel look like a trivial programming exercise. While
oftimes system dependent portions are coded in assembly or C, the bulk
of the computational algorithms are in Fortran.

  Until other languages support for fast FP arithmetic and function libraries
reaches the level of Fortran support, this is not likely to change, and new
packages are still going to be written to use existing libraries, and code
from existing programs in much the same way as C programmers steal and hack
local versions of libc routines when creating a new user application.

  Until such hardware and software libraries are thoroughly tested and verified
with several years of proven track record, no massive move to convert existing
packages is liable to arise.

  Until some group starts to convert existing packages to non-Fortran
environments, which means until there is some viable reason to do so that
funding agencies and scientists whose only interaction with the programming
environment is through the user interface can use to justify the expense and
effort, none of this is liable to occur.

>In the end it's all about getting the job done and done correctly and
>efficiently. But that rarely enters into these discussions.
>
>	-Barry Shein, Boston University

  Fortran currently does its job, does it reasonably well, and often more
efficiently than the competition. An adamant assertion that all OS' should
never be written in anything but prolog and any that aren't are neanderthal
and should be scrapped, is about as sensible a comment as trying to tell
computational scientists to scrap Fortran. 

  C may have the strings capability to print the final result, but Fortran
has the FP capability to compute it. One should use the appropriate tool
for the appropriate application, even if this means learning a second
language.

  Now if we can only broaden the horizons of the diehard Fortran nuts and
the fanatic new-wave of Unix gurus to half the extent of Barry's, maybe 
some really exciting things could be achieved.

Ross W. Wetmore                 | rwwetmore@water.NetNorth
University of Waterloo          | rwwetmore@math.waterloo.edu
Waterloo, Ontario N2L 3G1       | {clyde, ihnp4, ubc-vision, utcsri}
(519) 885-1211 ext 3491         |   !watmath!rwwetmore