From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,e859f774bbb3dfb3 X-Google-Thread: 1094ba,40d8c5edfa36ea47 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,gid1094ba,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!l42g2000hsc.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: Terence Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.fortran Subject: Re: another way to shoot yourself in the foot? Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2008 15:49:51 -0700 (PDT) Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: <97999a95-1d2f-4bbb-8dd2-c528bd37e7c4@l42g2000hsc.googlegroups.com> References: <54157920-377a-441b-9b0b-f0c4f9ddffec@f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com> <54435596-5e7f-4686-a2b7-1e22d7c4b186@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com> <_wPbk.7600$L_.4566@flpi150.ffdc.sbc.com> <1ijtbxq.1t7i71w700eykN%nospam@see.signature> NNTP-Posting-Host: 121.210.2.246 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1215643791 10254 127.0.0.1 (9 Jul 2008 22:49:51 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2008 22:49:51 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: l42g2000hsc.googlegroups.com; posting-host=121.210.2.246; posting-account=FW_-4goAAAAFAYCHU68g0mbegI3Vtoxh User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Opera/9.10 (Windows NT 5.0; U; en),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:1062 comp.lang.fortran:2557 Date: 2008-07-09T15:49:51-07:00 List-Id: SNIP:- >Why does Gary Scott's company use almost entirely C++ if Gary Scott recommended Fortran? I have met this situation many times. As an example, a very large Oil Company first wrote its accounting software n 1961 in Fortran, using integer arithemetic and separate tracking of cents or pennies, on an IBM 1401 (after using plugboard hardware). This included payroll. Later, following IBM advice they took the PL/1 route after first deviating via Cobol (and RPG and Mark4 !). Very much later, Cobol, PL/1 and Fortran programmers became hard to find, so the C and C++ languages were adopted after a look at Ada and much talk with Borland. Basic was considered and actually used for quick "stuff". Meanwhile I kept on updating the Fortran compilers and the BMD and BMDP mathematical packages (which are/were Fortran IV source code). The points to consider always are:- a) what the programming gurus" on staff think are the best options, b) what the personnel staff say are the long-range availability of programming candidates and prices, c) what the universities and technical colleges have decided to teach for problem-solving, especially to electrical, engineering and geophysical/geology and mining students. What a company finally decides on, can differ, even when competing in the same fields. And so long-term computer expert staff may know one language is far better for the company's future, through years of exposure and use of alternatives, yet have to bow to instructives based on economic forces. One solution I was not able to implement, was to take any new programmers willing and available, and re-teach them a reasoned, chosen and company-wide imposed language, which would have been Fortran IV (over PL/1 by a hair) and of course going to F90 as soon an F95 became available, one sure step behind. I DID manage to get the concept accepted of hard-disk computer workstations instead of terminals and maninframes well before it became glaringly obvious as cheaper and more flexible. Intercommunication was via minicomputers as message and file-passing nodes and central file back-up and archiving points.