Re: Java or C++?

"Thomas G. Marshall" <tgm2tothe10thpower@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote in message news:TJy9f.735$L56.132@xxxxxxxxxxx
> And after all that has been said about fortran lately, I'm beginning to
> wonder if it wouldn't be better served by adopting a new name altogether.
> There is a kneejerk reaction to it, much like that toward Cobol, which is
> probably historically deserved (maybe?) but not any longer. {long shrug
> with palms up}
We have much the same problem with Ada. Now that we are in the third
generation of the language, with many improvements over the first version
even in the second generation. The compilers generate much more efficient
code, we can target a lot of environments; we have inheritance, polymorphism,
genericity, and dynamic binding; tasking is greatly improved, and every aspect
of the language that was troubling in the early 1980's has been dealt with. It
is now the best choice available for software that needs a high-level of
reliability. Yet, people still think of in terms of the old DoD language of
the "eighties."

Oh, and you're correct about Fortran. It is a far-cry from the Fortran II
I used back in the late 1960's. Vastly improved, I'd say.

Richard Riehle