FORTRAN (in all uppercase!) comprehensible by humans?!?
Interesting perspective. I can see the writer never tried to debug a FORMAT statement...or wrestled with the fact that an ENCODE statement decodes, and a DECODE statement encodes....
"It's hard for me, you know, living in this beautiful White House, to give you a firsthand assessment."
— George W. Bush, when asked if he believed Iraq was in a state of civil war (Newsweek, 26 Feb 07)
Edited by jb4 March 20, 2007, 02:12:33 PM EDT
Edited by jb4 March 20, 2007, 02:13:26 PM EDT
And don't get me started on COMMON blocks
Actually - for number crunching it was tops - better than C or C++. But for structured programming it was kind of awful. Computed gotos? ICK! And no dynamic allocation. We had 3 images for everything laying around - small, medium, and large. Sizes referred to static array allocation sizes.
Yes I did get my start hacking F77 on VAX/VMS systems.
No, I don't miss it at all.
Impeach, Indict, Incarcerate, Inject
Bush, Cheney, Gonzalez, Rumsfeld, Rove, Rice
That's too common
I did a bit of FORTRAN programming on HP1000 real time minis (crunching some curves).
It's all relative!
Work much with assemblers? That pretty much was the other choice in those days. Ever try to port an assembler program to another architecture?
He was pioneer. And, he didn't stop with FORTRAN. He was the primary inventor of the [link|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backus-Naur_form|Backus-Naur form] for expressing the syntax and semantics of computer languages. He first used it in defining [link|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algol_language|ALGOL].
When fascism comes to America, it'll be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross. -- Sinclair Lewis