Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cornell!batcomputer!thompson
From: thompson@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu (Steve Thompson)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran
Subject: Re: C to Fortran conversion (was: fortran to c conversion)
Message-ID: <7735@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu>
Date: 12 Apr 89 22:17:34 GMT
References: <7713@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu> <1860@wpi.wpi.edu> <3738@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu>
Reply-To: thompson@tcgould.tn.cornell.edu (Steve Thompson)
Organization: Cornell Theory Center, Cornell University, Ithaca NY
Lines: 19
Distribution:usa

In article <3738@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu> dillon@uhccux.UUCP (Ian Dillon) writes:
>In article <1860@wpi.wpi.edu> lfoard@wpi.wpi.edu (Lawrence C Foard) writes:
>>Goes to show C is simply better than Fortran ;)
>
>This is soooo tempting but I'll keep my flames to myself on this one.  
>Personally, I like them both, as each language has its moment in the sun.
>

Never could resist temptation. I agree that C is nicer to work with on
many unix boxes, where the fortran is not so good (we have some SGI
300 series machines, can you say C-R-A-P). However, IMHO, fortran on
the VAX blows C completely out of the water, especially for text
manipulation (and I have written many thousands of lines of each).
Nearly all of my VMS fortran code (all of the bits without system calls)
ports easily from our VAX running VMS to our DECstation 3100's (I haven't
counted, but it's over 95%), which is more than I can say for C between
our various unix machines.

Steve