john@ghostwheel.unm.edu (John Prentice) (12/03/90)
In article <1990Nov30.163613.9562@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca> mroussel@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Marc Roussel) writes: > > I think I'm pretty typical of Fortran users... > ... Until >then, I don't want your silly-ass opinion. If you want to compare >languages, do it on comp.lang.misc where someone cares ... > Bunk. This kind of bull is one reason Fortran has a bad name, too many scientists who stick their head in the sand and ignore developments in computer science. I too am a "typical Fortran user" and I for one think that it is healthy to have debates such as this one. It allows people to see the virtues of other languages and maybe learn a little about something new. As to doing it in this news group, this one is read by scientists and I therefore think it is perfectly appropiate since it is exactly this audience that would best profit from knowing more about computer science. This is said, I would remind you, from the perspective of a computational PHYSICIST, not a computer scientist. I have to tell you, the world of scientific computing is changing and one's choice of language (be it Fortran, C, or whatever you like) may very well have to change with it. That is why I have found this discussion helpful, it has illuminated several points on both sides that I had not considered. Perhaps there should be a new newsgroup for scientific computation (or maybe one for ostriches), but I think this one is fine. John Prentice Amparo Corporation Albuquerque, NM john@unmfys.unm.edu