Re: Is FORTRAN a dying language? (not a troll)
From: Paul Van Delst (paul.vandelst_at_noaa.gov)
Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 17:30:23 -0400
Dr Chaos wrote:
> Paul Van Delst <email@example.com> wrote:
>>Dr Chaos wrote:
>>>But the engineer will probably know MATLAB, which can go to
>>>Fortran 95 reasonably easily, except for pointers.
>>You know, I've seen this assertion made before. I reckon matlab code looks like C!
> Other than using () for array access like Fortran and unlike C, other
> than having block structured control structures with "end" like
> Fortran and unlike C, other than having array slice notation and
> concepts like Fortran, and unlike C, unlike distinguishing pointers
> from arrays, like Fortran and unlike C, and having implicit
> declarations of variables like Fortran unlike C, and having array
> intrinsics, like Fortran and unlike C, having no 'address of'
> operator, like Fortran and unlike C....
> I guess maybe.
> whoops, changed my mind. :)
Allright allright... I concede! :o) But what about that darn ";" you have to stick at the
end of most lines to stop the results from being printed? Argh - drives me nuts.
When I meant it looked like C I really meant that most of the matlab code I've seen has
looked as much like a dog's dinner as most of the C code I've seen. But maybe that hasn't
anything to do with the language - I've seen plenty of horrendous Fortran code too -- some
of it, I hesitate to admit, my own a number of years after writing it. :o(