Re: Ada vs Fortran for scientific applications

["news.hinet.net" <bubble@ares.com.tw>]

what does we discuss "Ada vs Fortran for scientific applications"?
    does it mean which syntax is suitable for scientific application?

if you mean it, you didn't waiting for fortan "2008" .
matlab may be another good choose.
.
It's good for scientific application.
why?

there are  over 30+ math library .
simple syntax is easy to learn and writing.
high performance, it utilize fortran's math library and  kernel is writing 
in C and fortran.
a lot of language interfaces , such as java , c , fortran , and ada (ada is 
especial in realtime and simulink).
you can call those language directly.
can translate to C code.
built-in complex type support.

It has operator overloading.
you can do mult(a,b,...) or a .*  b  .* ...
or matix Multiplies mmult(a,b...) or a  *  b  *....

using vectorization. you almost can reduce most loop syntax in your code

more detail sse
http://www.mathworks.com/

of course,
there are some disadvantages.
weak type checking often causes errors in runtime.   It almost never happens 
in ada.
hard to read but easy to wirte. (writing is happy and read is painful)

In scientific application, It should be better than ada and fortan
^__^.

"Dan Nagle" <dannagle@verizon.net> ???????:tXlcg.3832$p13.2487@trnddc07...
> Hello,
>
> Nasser Abbasi wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> 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)
>
> It is?  All the intrinsic operators in Fortran apply
> element-wise, and * is no exception.  How does that make
> the intrinsic procedure harder to read?
>
> The applications programmer may always define a matrix type,
> and define the * operator to be the matmul intrinsic.
> Note the distinction between "rank-2 array" and "matrix".
>
> <snip>
>
>> I was surprised to read that now FORTRAN is called Fortran, (only one 
>> letter is uppercase). This is progress (I think).
>
> I think Fortran and Ada have a lot in common,
> both are being actively developed (though not on the same schedule).
> And both are threatened by the "I only know C++, it's the best language"
> syndrome.  :-(  And, I think, both are superior technical solutions
> within their respective problem domains.  Although Eiffel interests
> me also.
>
> -- 
> Cheers!
>
> Dan Nagle
> Purple Sage Computing Solutions, Inc.