Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!hc!lanl!jlg
From: jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran
Subject: Re: C to Fortran conversion (was: fortran to c conversion)
Message-ID: <11924@lanl.gov>
Date: 12 Apr 89 19:57:14 GMT
References: <1860@wpi.wpi.edu>
Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory
Lines: 19

From article <1860@wpi.wpi.edu>, by lfoard@wpi.wpi.edu (Lawrence C Foard):
> In article <7713@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu> kahn@tcgould.tn.cornell.edu (Shahin Kahn) writes:
> [...]      It would also consume huge amounts of memory since Fortran has no
> dynamic memory allocation, you would have to make an array that would be the
> biggest memory size possible. Of course you would also have to simulate a
> stack since Fortran doesn't support recursion....
> 
> Goes to show C is simply better than Fortran ;)

Of course, Fortran would be better than C if it had dynamic memory and
recursion (like 8x does 8-).  But, for thing that don't need these features,
Fortran is already better than C.

.
.
.
.
.
.