Home > Archive > Fortran > March 2004 > A constructive exploration of alternate futures for Fortran
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
A constructive exploration of alternate futures for Fortran
|
|
| analyst41 2004-03-28, 12:00 am |
| Lets agree with James Giles that the phenomenal popularity of
C/C++/Java has little to do with objective merits (assuming I have
understood him correctly).
I have no doubt that f90,f95 etc. are the result of the deliberate
determination of the committee to make objective improvements to
Fortran 77.
But then, if we invoke the converse of Giles's theorem -
True, objective improvments are no guarantee that the improved
language would actually get used to an extent that would constitute
"success".
Perhaps we should explore
(1) What is the user base of Fortran currently and what Fortran are
they using ?
(2) What type of applications are out there right now ?
(3) Is there pressure from PHBs to move to C/C++/Java ?
(4) In the event that the official development path (f90,f95,f2003) is
not for everybody, what is the alternative (subset of the official
fortran or a new language) ?
(5) Is usage in Large Scale Capitalistic enterprises a criterion for
success ?
I would also ask the following critical question and suggest my
answer.
What is the core competence of Fortran that would ensure is indefinite
continued use ?
Ability to set down quantitative relationships between inputs and
outputs in effcient, legible, easily maintanable code. Please note
that this does not necessarily mean "number crunching". Fortran would
be the natural language for the discipline of management science -
optimizing transportation networks, Supply chains,airline crew
scheduling,Revenue Management Financial planning etc.
| |
| Ken Plotkin 2004-03-28, 12:00 am |
| On 27 Mar 2004 06:48:20 -0800, analyst41@hotmail.com (analyst41)
wrote:
[snip]
>I would also ask...
[snip]
Why?
This is one hell of a troll. It will be interesting to see how many
people get sucked in.
| |
| analyst41 2004-03-28, 12:00 am |
| Ken Plotkin <kplotkin@nospam-cox.net> wrote in message news:<kbmb605jvch5jr2khfjr9panogn0nh3bhl@4ax.com>...
> On 27 Mar 2004 06:48:20 -0800, analyst41@hotmail.com (analyst41)
> wrote:
>
> [snip]
> [snip]
>
> Why?
>
> This is one hell of a troll.
If you'd be so kind, please explain the etiquette of this cliche from
internet g -speak - I understand that any internet-g can call a
post or poster a "troll".
> It will be interesting to see how many
> people get sucked in.
But to me this seems vicious - indirectly admonishing others not to
respond.
| |
| Ken Plotkin 2004-03-28, 10:29 pm |
| On 27 Mar 2004 16:04:07 -0800, analyst41@hotmail.com (analyst41)
wrote:
>If you'd be so kind, please explain the etiquette of this cliche from
>internet g-speak - I understand that any internet-g can call a
>post or poster a "troll".
Your post is essentially baiting people in the Fortrean NG into
defending Fortran. Yes, it's a cliche. But it's of your doing.
>
>But to me this seems vicious - indirectly admonishing others not to
>respond.
Perhaps you're right about the indirectness.
Hey, everyone - please don't feed the troll!
Ken Plotkin
|
|
|
|
|