wgh@Grumpy.UUCP (William G. Hutchison) (10/06/88)
In article <3810@Portia.Stanford.EDU>, dilvish@Portia.Stanford.EDU (Jay Shrauner) writes: > In article <3520@phri.UUCP> roy@phri.UUCP (Roy Smith) writes: > >... unless the NeXT has a good Fortran package [ specifics deleted ] > >it's just not interesting to us except as a cute toy. > I hardly think it wise to chain the newest technology to antiquated languages. I agree in principle, but most software is written in antiquated, inappropriate languages. In my opinion, a vendor who wants NOT to be chained to these ancient mistakes should support these old languages by making available high-quality translators or front ends to something like a universal assembly language (e.g. C or Ada). Anybody who wants to disagree about C and Ada being 'assembly languages' is welcome to do so (I DO know that they are not so, literally), but I mean that they are reasonably portable languages that also allow low-level operations when necessary. -- Bill Hutchison, DP Consultant rutgers!cbmvax!burdvax!Grumpy!wgh Unisys UNIX Portation Center "What one fool can do, another can!" P.O. Box 500, M.S. B121 Ancient Simian Proverb, quoted by Blue Bell, PA 19424 Sylvanus P. Thompson, in _Calculus Made Easy_