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,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,6609c40f81b32989 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Thread: 1094ba,9bdec20bcc7f3687 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,gid8d3408f8c3,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII Path: g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!r1g2000yqb.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: MRE Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.fortran Subject: Re: Why is Ada considered "too specialized" for scientific use Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2010 02:17:29 -0700 (PDT) Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: References: <4bb9c72c$0$6990$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net> <4bbb3f22$0$7660$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: 193.25.39.47 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1270631849 4516 127.0.0.1 (7 Apr 2010 09:17:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2010 09:17:29 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: r1g2000yqb.googlegroups.com; posting-host=193.25.39.47; posting-account=9oKlagoAAAArpDKc-z70x-nwdNs7Rw_P User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; de; rv:1.9.2.3) Gecko/20100401 Firefox/3.6.3 (.NET CLR 3.5.30729),gzip(gfe) Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:9910 comp.lang.fortran:22214 Date: 2010-04-07T02:17:29-07:00 List-Id: On 6 Apr., 19:53, Sebastian Hanigk wrote: > Warren writes: > > Obviously Fortran persists because of existing code base and > > those that only "know" that. But egads, the current rendition > > of Fortran seem to have so many "bags on the side" and is > > downright "butt ugly". =A0Why anyone would want to continue > > to wallow in that swill, is beyond me. Ada as a language OTOH, > > is so nice and clean by comparison. > > I won't even start with your puny attempts at a language crusade, > suffice to say that all the niceness and cleanness is quite unusable if > you don't have a compiler. And on most supercomputers where serious > number crunching is performed, you do not have an Ada compiler and even > building gnat would be a very major pain (bootstrapping ...). > > Regards, > > Sebastian Depends on your cost-model. If your man-hours for writing the code don't count, go on with C or Fortran. If they are a factor, maybe it's worth to spend a couple of thousand for getting support from a compiler vendor to port GNAT. Thanks btw. for showing quite clearly, that it's not only the "Ada- Guys" who are rude. Marc