arritt@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu (12/09/90)
One of the frustrations of practicing scientists who are genuinely interested in learning about C (or any other potentially useful computational technique, for that matter) is that it's difficult to get information that is both objective and understandable. When I've tried to learn about these things, the responses are generally of two broad types: 1. "You actually program in Fortran ??? Wow, you must be either older than John von Neumann, or you're really stupid !!! EVERYBODY knows that C (or whatever) is the only thing to use !!! And if you have to ask why, you must be **REALLY** stupid !!!" 2. "C has several powerful features. One is the ability to create a flat addressed pointer to a multiply pipelined data structure having recursive kludge-foobar interdependence with the gallium arsenide WYSIWYG SCSI fsck grep awk #include XSendEvent glorp sndwk p9eufiwju8429-v n80& @!4%tf8*= 809(*&89kl ji....." You get the point --- even those of us Fortran dinosaurs who keep an open mind, often find it nearly impossible to learn about new computational techniques which might be useful. Can anyone recommend a concise, readable explanation of the benefits of C for the practicing scientist (NOT the professional programmer)? If C has the potential to make my life easier, I'd like to know. ________________________________________________________________________ Raymond W. Arritt | Assistant Professor | Dept. of Physics and Astronomy | "everyone knew that as time went Univ. of Kansas | by they'd get a little bit older Lawrence, KS 66045 | and a little bit slower..." arritt@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu | arritt@ukanvax.bitnet |
dmocsny@minerva.che.uc.edu (Daniel Mocsny) (12/10/90)
In article <27304.27610742@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu> arritt@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu writes: >One of the frustrations of practicing scientists who are genuinely >interested in learning about C (or any other potentially useful >computational technique, for that matter) is that it's difficult to >get information that is both objective and understandable. I have been trying to find and study all books which attempt to present C language programming, or C program examples, to scientists and engineers who are likely to have a background in FORTRAN. So far, I have located only the following titles. Would the readers of these newsgroups kindly recommend others, if any exist? I've already scanned a few on-line card catalogs, but my list can't be exhaustive. Press, et al. _Numerical Recipes in C: the Art of Scientific Computing_, Cambridge University Press 1988. Kempf, J., _Numerical Software Tools in C_, Prentice-Hall 1987. Baker, L., _C Tools for Scientists and Engineers_, McGraw-Hill 1989. Baker, L., _More C Tools for Scientists and Engineers_, McGraw-Hill 1990. Books specific to particular engineering or scientific disciplines would also be useful. -- Dan Mocsny Snail: Internet: dmocsny@minerva.che.uc.edu Dept. of Chemical Engng. M.L. 171 dmocsny@uceng.uc.edu University of Cincinnati 513/751-6824 (home) 513/556-2007 (lab) Cincinnati, Ohio 45221-0171
jav8106@ritvax.isc.rit.edu (Doctor FORTRAN) (12/10/90)
In article <27304.27610742@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu>, arritt@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu writes...
% If C has the potential to make my life easier, I'd like to know.
I am afraid that C has the potential of making your life much more difficult.
Forget about it. You already have a superior tool for the type of work you do.
You'll have enough to keep yourself busy with when it comes time to start using
FORTRAN 90.
As far as the people who try to convince you that C is superior, well, chances
are that you've read it here over and over: C has some advantages over FORTRAN
for some problems, but these problems are limited to computer science-type
applications. From what you have said, your programming tasks (like the tasks
of many of us here at comp.lang.fortran) could only be made more complicated
using C. Take it from somebody who programs in both C and FORTRAN: Numerical
problems can be coded faster and more reliably in FORTRAN than in C, and the
code is also more readable and easier to maintain.
If you are looking for the support of a fellow programmer, if you need that
support to keep those egotistical, boorish, know-nothing bit jockeys from
getting your goat, well, you've got it!
C ==========================================================================
C === This subroutine will write a signature at the end of a posting.
Subroutine Signature
Write (*, 101)
101 Format (1H1, 'Doctor FORTRAN', /, ' Master of the Realm', /,
1 ' Reply: jav8106@ritvax.isc.rit.edu')
Return
End
gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn) (12/11/90)
In article <6910@uceng.UC.EDU> dmocsny@minerva.che.uc.edu (Daniel Mocsny) writes: >I have been trying to find and study all books which attempt to >present C language programming, or C program examples, to scientists >and engineers who are likely to have a background in FORTRAN. The absolutely best C tutorial for already experienced programmers who don't know C (are there any left?) is Kernighan and Ritchie's "The C Programming Language"; in most cases the Second Edition is preferred. C is so much more suited to general applications than Fortran that limiting one's attention to science/engineering applications would produce a quite imperfect understanding of how to exploit the language.
u714092@eagle.larc.nasa.gov (prichard devon ) (12/11/90)
In article <14699@smoke.brl.mil> gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn) writes: Xref: abcfd20.larc.nasa.gov comp.lang.fortran:1010 comp.lang.c:4411 Path: abcfd20.larc.nasa.gov!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!cs.utexas.edu!yale!cmcl2!adm!smoke!gwyn From: gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn) Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran,comp.lang.c Date: 10 Dec 90 19:55:58 GMT References: <27304.27610742@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu> <6910@uceng.UC.EDU> Followup-To: comp.lang.fortran Organization: U.S. Army Ballistic Research Laboratory, APG, MD. Lines: 13 C is so much more suited to general applications than Fortran that limiting one's attention to science/engineering applications would produce a quite imperfect understanding of how to exploit the language. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ precisely the point of the current flame war; I'm not paid to exploit the features of a programming language. I am paid to develop aerodynamic/ aeroacoustic prediction methods. of course, in the fastest and cheapest means possible. for 95% of my problems requiring the use of the computer to solve them, Fortran has been the tool to use. it has not yet become cost effective for me to really learn any other programming language; the 5% which Fortran does not address well are either; hacked with Fortran, reformulated to a more easily solved problem, or not solved. the average engineer ain't sitting around with his thumb up his *ss looking for new problems; he's trying to make time to solve the many drudge tasks already on his desk (same for female engineers, of course :) ). the two areas where, with C for example, another language does better than Fortran, are; databasing of large amounts of experimental data, and graphics/visualization. and the databases we have can be 1-2 GB per run of a flyover test. implicit double of C don't cut it there, either. from a cost basis, until someone writes a new engineering-oriented programming language that can be learned in 1-2 quarters in university, is fast etc. like Fortran, then few employers will pay bucks to migrate their programming to another language. after all, not only is there the cost of training all those engineers, but the down time when they aren't working. in my case, even if someone picked up my salary for two months and sent me to class, my supers wouldn't allow it, stuff's gotta get done. and I'm not that important relative to the other grunts in my dept. -- |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| | Devon Prichard making the world safe for helicopters ... | | u714092@eagle.larc.nasa.gov, prichard@ias.larc.nasa.gov | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
rhl@grendel.Princeton.EDU (Robert Lupton (the Good)) (12/11/90)
Well, Doug has a reputation as a computer person so maybe they won't take him seriously. I have a PhD in astrophysics, so I count as a scientist and I echo: Kernighan and Ritchie is the best book to learn C from if you have appreciable computer experience.
harrison@necssd.NEC.COM (Mark Harrison) (12/11/90)
In article <14699@smoke.brl.mil>, gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn) writes: > C is so much more suited to general applications than Fortran that > limiting one's attention to science/engineering applications would > produce a quite imperfect understanding of how to exploit the language. One solution to this problem is to use both languages. I helped some EE's move some engineering applications to the PC, using Microsoft Fortran. One of the enhancements they made was to use Microsoft C for the screen interface (Using the excellent shareware "Window Boss") and file operations, and using Fortran for the number crunching. -- Mark Harrison harrison@necssd.NEC.COM (214)518-5050 {necntc, cs.utexas.edu}!necssd!harrison standard disclaimers apply...
doug@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Douglas W O'neal) (12/12/90)
In article <4624@idunno.Princeton.EDU> rhl@grendel.Princeton.EDU (Robert Lupton (the Good)) writes:
->
->Well, Doug has a reputation as a computer person so maybe they won't
->take him seriously. I have a PhD in astrophysics, so I count as a
->scientist and I echo:
->
-> Kernighan and Ritchie is the best book to learn C from if you have
->appreciable computer experience.
Agreed. Use K&R second edition (from a Ph.D. in theoretical chemistry).
--
Doug O'Neal, Distributed Systems Programmer, Johns Hopkins University
doug@jhuvms.bitnet, doug@jhuvms.hcf.jhu.edu, mimsy!aplcen!jhunix!doug
Like many of the features of UNIX, UUCP appears theoretically
unworkable... - DEC Professional, April 1990
userAKDU@mts.ucs.UAlberta.CA (Al Dunbar) (12/12/90)
In article <14699@smoke.brl.mil>, gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn) writes: >In article <6910@uceng.UC.EDU> dmocsny@minerva.che.uc.edu (Daniel Mocsny) writes: >>I have been trying to find and study all books which attempt to >>present C language programming, or C program examples, to scientists >>and engineers who are likely to have a background in FORTRAN. > >The absolutely best C tutorial for already experienced programmers >who don't know C (are there any left?) is Kernighan and Ritchie's >"The C Programming Language"; in most cases the Second Edition is >preferred. > >C is so much more suited to general applications than Fortran that >limiting one's attention to science/engineering applications would >produce a quite imperfect understanding of how to exploit the language. Limiting one's attention to science/engineering applications may indeed hinder one's development as a C programmer. The goals of those involved in such applications is usually more involved with solving problems in those areas than with contemplating the beauty of a three line recursive algorithm for calculating Postal codes (i.e. Canadian ZIP code). Pardon the sarcasm, but aren't a lot of afficionados trying to tell Fortran users that C is better for what they want to do? If so, then why is it not possible to impart this knowledge without bringing in what is, to them, extraneous? -------------------+------------------------------------------- Al Dunbar | Edmonton, Alberta | "this mind left intentionally blank" CANADA | - Manuel Writer -------------------+-------------------------------------------
userAKDU@mts.ucs.UAlberta.CA (Al Dunbar) (12/12/90)
In article <14699@smoke.brl.mil>, gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn) writes: >In article <6910@uceng.UC.EDU> dmocsny@minerva.che.uc.edu (Daniel Mocsny) writes: >>I have been trying to find and study all books which attempt to <<<deletions>>> >produce a quite imperfect understanding of how to exploit the language. I am so tired of seeing the same sequences of articles in different newsgroups that I am considering the possibility of cross-posting myself! Actually, I would guess that I already am cross-posting. Why not start up comp.lang.c.vs.ftn for those topics of interest to readers of .c and .fortran? -------------------+------------------------------------------- Al Dunbar | Edmonton, Alberta | "this mind left intentionally blank" CANADA | - Manuel Writer -------------------+-------------------------------------------