Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!ncar!noao!arizona!naucse!wew
From: wew@naucse.UUCP (Bill Wilson)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: Language illiteracy
Message-ID: <680@naucse.UUCP>
Date: 3 May 88 23:02:37 GMT
References: <786@trwcsed.trwrb.UUCP>
Distribution: na
Organization: Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ
Lines: 26
Summary: Hurray!


I can agree with Jeff Arenberg on his position.  I also believe
that there is no "PERFECT" language and that to do things
efficiently one may have to program in more than one language
(ever hear of mixed language programming?).  I can easily program
in C, FORTRAN, PASCAL and a number of other langauges.  I pick
the right one for the job and also take into account what code
may already have been written so that I do not have to re-invent    
the wheel.

Let's be reasonable.  When the perfect language arrives, we can 
all jump on the band wagon.  In the meantime, why don't we
discuss something that may lead to more productivity.

One last question, why are some of the main data managers for
MS-DOS being translated from Fortran to C?       

Also, I am writing a stat package in C and my results are the same
as SPSS, SYSTAT and SAS.  Since they are mostly written in Fortran 
does that suggest anything?


-- 
Bill Wilson
Northern AZ Univ
Flagstaff, AZ 86011
{These views are mine and do not necessarily reflect those of my employer}