Re: Fortran vs C++ vs. etc (has little to do with realtime anymore)

[rhawkins@iastate.edu (Rick Hawkins)]

In article <vi8k9ge42bw.fsf@drabble.fnal.gov>,
Oleg Krivosheev  <kriol@fnal.gov> wrote:

>rhawkins@iastate.edu (Rick Hawkins) writes:

>> yes!!!  learning c++ after not using c for ten years took some work.
>> Fortran after 12 years didn't; I could sit back donw and code.

>well, if you're talking about F77, yes. FYI, there are already
>F90 and F95 here. I doubt you can program in F95 without
>learning - just as you did with C++.

I'm using F90; It was Fortran IV on a pr1me and almost-f77 on tops 20
back then.

>> I'm not going to knock c++; it's wonderful for where it belongs.  But
>> for my fairly simple models that just need numbers pounded into
>> submission, and which won't be reused, Fortran is *much* easier, if for
>> no other reason than high-level I/O.  I was spending 2/3 of my time in
>> c++ either writing pieces builit into fortran, or looking for libraries
>> with the pieces.  I think I switched when i couldn't find a max(), and
>> couldn't figure out the single example of writing a function with
>> variable number of arguments (actually, i used smalltalk for a while in
>> between, but that's another story).

>cannot find max() in c++?

I tried.  I looked.  I'm convinced it must be there, but . . .

>couldn't figure how to write function with variable numbers
>of arguments?

In the two books that I had, there was a single example, whihc managed
not to explain. I  wasn't just the issue of variable number of
arguments, but of arbitrarily large variable numbers 
(i wanted my max()!  :)


>there is something wrong with your C++ installation
>or with your C/C++ book.

I assume it's the books; the compiler was either DEC cc or gcc; i forget
now.

rick


-- 
R E HAWKINS
rhawkins@iastate.edu

These opinions will not be those of ISU until they pay my retainer.