Re: Why C++ is successful

["Larry Elmore" <ljelmore@montana.campus.mci.net>]

Ell wrote in message <35c0edf6.9796817@news.erols.com>...
>"Pat Rogers" <progers@acm.org> wrote:
>
>>Juan Carlos Gil Montoro wrote in message <35BF51A2.B199FDFA@gmv.es>...
>>>Pat Rogers wrote:
>>>>
>>>> That's why I'm learning Java now, and Eiffel and C++ in the past.  They
all
>>>> contribute something to make one a better developer.  I need to take
another
>>>> look at Fortran, because it sure isn't the Fortran IV I used in the old
>>>> days!
>>>
>>>  You'll be happy you did.
>>>  Fortran 90 and Fortran 95 are modern languages unbeatable (IMHO) in
>>>their niche.
>>
>>
>>Since you mention it, what would you say is Fortran's niche that the
language is
>>unbeatable in filling?  (Serious request for opinion, not yet another
language
>>flame war ignition.)
>
>Mathematical calculations.  The science, engineering, business, and
>other groups requiring large amounts of efficient math processing have
>overwhelmingly adopted Fortran for decades.

But isn't this largely due to a combination of inertia, legacy code,
existing libraries plus compilers that are very, very good at optimizing
that kind of code (they've certainly had enough time to get them working
right!), rather than anything to do with the language itself?

Larry