Confused here.

Post #135,823 by a6l6e6x 1/14/04 10:28:10 PM Reply	Confused here. Unless you have source for huge Fortran programs that you cannot practically port to say C. Probably before everyone else's time, there was a language called [link\|http://wombat.doc.ic.ac.uk/foldoc/foldoc.cgi?Michigan+Algorithm+Decoder\|MAD] (Michigan Algorithm Decoder) and a compiler to go with it. One of the associated programs was MADTRAN that translated (i.e. automatically ported) FORTRAN programs to MAD. MAD programs ran much faster. The last time I wrote in Fortran, IIRC, was in 1972. Fortran should be deader than COBOL! :) Alex The mind is not a vessel to be filled but a fire to be kindled. -- Plutarch
Post #135,839 by deSitter 1/15/04 1:18:10 AM Reply	Re: Confused here. I have the occasional need to actually crunch numbers, as in running a gravity code - these are always dependent on well-known FORTRAN libraries. Despite heroic efforts, C and C++ have not replaced FORTRAN as the language of choice for numerical computing. -drl
Post #135,844 by tuberculosis 1/15/04 2:35:59 AM 8/21/07 5:56:56 AM Reply	I think many people have moved to matlab for that At least for explorational crunching of a casual/developmental nature. "I believe that many of the systems we build today in Java would be better built in Smalltalk and Gemstone." -- Martin Fowler, JAOO 2003 Edited by tuberculosis Aug. 21, 2007, 05:56:56 AM EDT Expand All History
Post #135,847 by pwhysall 1/15/04 3:09:16 AM Reply	Fizzy Cysts still use FORTRAN At least according to Matt Nobes (manobes on here, fizzy cyst by trade). Peter [link\|http://www.debian.org\|Shill For Hire] [link\|http://www.kuro5hin.org\|There is no K5 Cabal] [link\|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org\|Home Page - Now with added Zing!]

Welcome to IWETHEY!