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,c4cb2c432feebd9d
X-Google-Thread: 1094ba,c4cb2c432feebd9d
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,gid1094ba,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news3.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!feednews.vanderbilt.edu!feed.news.qwest.net!nems.noaa.gov!not-for-mail
From: Paul Van Delst <Paul.vanDelst@noaa.gov>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.fortran
Subject: Re: Ada vs Fortran for scientific applications
Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 13:22:01 -0400
Organization: CIMSS@NOAA/NCEP/EMC
Message-ID: <e4sv0g$tdl$1@news.nems.noaa.gov>
References: <mubcg.13522$fb2.853@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>
 <epcs4e.qb8.ln@hunter.axlog.fr> <tHkcg.6937$kR6.484@trnddc05>
 <sxlcg.75860$F_3.64697@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: lnx374.ncep.noaa.gov
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: news.nems.noaa.gov 1148321616 30133 140.90.192.92 (22 May 2006
 18:13:36 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: postmaster@noaa.gov
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 18:13:36 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.8-1.4.1 (X11/20060420)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
In-Reply-To: <sxlcg.75860$F_3.64697@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net>
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:4346 comp.lang.fortran:10088
Date: 2006-05-22T13:22:01-04:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Nasser Abbasi wrote:
> "Dan Nagle" <dannagle@verizon.net> wrote in message 
> news:tHkcg.6937$kR6.484@trnddc05...
> 
> 
>>>11) Operators on any types, including arrays. Define a matrix product as 
>>>"*"...
>>
>>How is Ada's operators for types better or worse than Fortran's?
>>Is Ada's "*" operator better than Fortran's matmul()?
>>
> 
> I'll answer the easy one for now since I have not had my coffee yet:
> 
> It is clear that
>    A*B
> is easier to read and understand than
>    MATMUL(A,B)
> would you not agree?

Hello,

At the risk of igniting a language war (not my intent) and/or exposing my ignorance of 
Ada, I find the former misleading. To me, A*B suggests a regular old multiplication of two 
arrays, rather than a matix multiplication. MATMUL(A,B) is definitely wordier but the 
intent is quite clear.

Sufficient exposure is enough to adapt to the Ada meaning of A*B, but you specifically 
mentioned one as clearly easier to read and understand .... so I'm tossing in my 2cents 
worth. :o)

If I had my druthers wrt succinctness, I'd use a different operator for matrix 
multiplication. Sort of like IDL where
   A#B
or
   A##B
signifies matrix multiplication (the two forms are, essentially, to avoid unnecessary 
transposing of the second matrix.)

(I'm sure there's myriad reasons why a different operator is a bad idea.)

cheers,

paulv


>>"Fortran" /= "FORTRAN 77"  ;-)
>>
> Yes :), I was surprised to read that now FORTRAN is called Fortran, (only 
> one letter is uppercase). This is progress (I think).
> 
> Nasser
> 
>  
> 
> 


-- 
Paul van Delst             Ride lots.
CIMSS @ NOAA/NCEP/EMC               Eddy Merckx
Ph: (301)763-8000 x7748
Fax:(301)763-8545