From: Oleg Krivosheev <kriol@fnal.gov>
Subject: Re: Fortran vs C++ vs. etc (has little to do with realtime anymore)
Date: 1997/09/18
Date: 1997-09-18T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <vi8k9ge42bw.fsf@drabble.fnal.gov> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 5vmbdl$v8f$1@news.iastate.edu
Hi,
rhawkins@iastate.edu (Rick Hawkins) writes:
>
> In article <5ve7c6$f4m$1@info.uah.edu>,
> Dr. Krishnan Chittur <chitturk@email.uah.edu> wrote:
>
> >Joseph M. O'Leary (NOSPAMjmoleary@earthlink.net) wrote:
> >
> >: Jeffrey Templon <templon@studbolt.physast.uga.edu> wrote in article
> >: > The fact remains (and will for some time) that many scientific
> >: programmers
> >: > are scientists FIRST and programmers SECOND.
> >........
> >: > So one of my reasons for Fortran still being around: you can write
> >: > a reasonable program which runs reasonably efficiently just by more
> >: > or less typing in an expression of a simple algorithm. Fortran's "mental
> >: > model" of the computer is very simple.
>
> >Well said! ... I still have to find an environment that will allow
> >me to develop a GUI as simply as I can write Fortran Code to
> >do calculations ... if there is one, please let me know.
>
> yes!!! learning c++ after not using c for ten years took some work.
> Fortran after 12 years didn't; I could sit back donw and code.
well, if you're talking about F77, yes. FYI, there are already
F90 and F95 here. I doubt you can program in F95 without
learning - just as you did with C++.
> I'm not going to knock c++; it's wonderful for where it belongs. But
> for my fairly simple models that just need numbers pounded into
> submission, and which won't be reused, Fortran is *much* easier, if for
> no other reason than high-level I/O. I was spending 2/3 of my time in
> c++ either writing pieces builit into fortran, or looking for libraries
> with the pieces. I think I switched when i couldn't find a max(), and
> couldn't figure out the single example of writing a function with
> variable number of arguments (actually, i used smalltalk for a while in
> between, but that's another story).
hmm...
cannot find max() in c++?
couldn't figure how to write function with variable numbers
of arguments?
there is something wrong with your C++ installation
or with your C/C++ book.
OK
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1997-09-18 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1997-09-13 0:00 Fortran vs C++ vs. etc (has little to do with realtime anymore) Dr. Krishnan Chittur
1997-09-15 0:00 ` Area Industrial y Electromec�nica
1997-09-16 0:00 ` Vanesch P.
1997-09-16 0:00 ` Jeffrey Templon
1997-09-16 0:00 ` Gary L. Scott
1997-09-17 0:00 ` Jenn-Ching Luo
1997-09-17 0:00 ` Gary L. Scott
1997-09-16 0:00 ` Rick Hawkins
1997-09-18 0:00 ` Oleg Krivosheev [this message]
1997-09-19 0:00 ` Rick Hawkins
1997-09-23 0:00 ` Oleg Krivosheev
1997-09-23 0:00 ` Gary L. Scott
1997-09-24 0:00 ` Rick Hawkins
1997-09-24 0:00 ` Xingzeng Liu
1997-09-25 0:00 ` const
1997-09-25 0:00 ` Oleg Krivosheev
[not found] <199709070005.TAA23336@manifold.algebra.com>
[not found] ` <5utbth$rdi@snews2.zippo.com>
[not found] ` <34131554.73F2310E@roda.roc.servtech.com>
[not found] ` <34157696.16620299@nntp.interaccess.com>
[not found] ` <JTV2J.97Sep9170655@cobra.cs.virginia.edu>
[not found] ` <3415CE44.3BD531@calfp.co.uk>
[not found] ` <341644F2.763D@BZZvnet.ibm.com>
1997-09-12 0:00 ` Jeffrey Templon
1997-09-13 0:00 ` Joseph M. O'Leary
1997-09-16 0:00 ` James F Cornwall
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox