Xref: utzoo comp.lang.c:9633 comp.lang.fortran:638 comp.lang.misc:1498
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!umd5!uvaarpa!mcnc!rti!xyzzy!meissner
From: meissner@xyzzy.UUCP (Michael Meissner)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.lang.fortran,comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: C for Scientific Programming
Message-ID: <816@xyzzy.UUCP>
Date: 25 Apr 88 22:48:00 GMT
References: <49015@sun.uucp> <7672@ncoast.UUCP>
Reply-To: meissner@xyzzy.UUCP (Michael Meissner)
Followup-To: comp.lang.misc
Organization: Data General (Languages @ Research Triangle Park, NC.)
Lines: 16
Keywords: shortcomings of C reiterated

In article <7672@ncoast.UUCP> btb@ncoast.UUCP (Brad Banko) writes:
| as for dynamic array dimensioning, i think that any experienced C programmer
| would immediately respond that NO other major language (Fortran, Pascal,
| Basic) allows the kinds of dynamic memory allocation that has been 
| available in yesterday's C all along... in malloc() and its relatives.

Ughhh, C, Fortran, Pascal, and Basic are not the only "major" languages,
and other languages support better dynamic memory allocation schemes.
For example, in PL/I and Algol, you can declare automatic arrays whose
size is based on an expression, and when the block is entered, the
compiler will dynamically allocate space for the array on stack.  When
the routine exits, the space automatically goes away.  In APL (and
probably LISP), you can change the size of array bounds dynamically.

Followups to comp.lang.misc!.
-- 
Michael Meissner, Data General.		Uucp: ...!mcnc!rti!xyzzy!meissner
					Arpa/Csnet:  meissner@dg-rtp.DG.COM