-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
On 09/15/14 15:02, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> what is wrong with fortran?
I don't know. Perhaps you can tell us.
OT(childhood psychological trauma){
I find it unreadable and had unpleasant experience
with fortran code. I actually had to **pick a compiler**
to the existing code in order to compile and get expected
results. After a few painful loops of "get a new compiler" -
"compile" - "fail" I was told that ifort should handle the
situation. I downloaded ifort (will RMS ever forgive me?)
and found out that my processor didn't support all the
instructions required for running ifort (SSE2). Of course
it (code failing to compile) is programmer's fault.
It was a part of my job so I couldn't just lay it off and
forget about it.
};
>> Unfortunately. First of all technically they are programers. It
>> looks like this kind of programmers have a hard time learning
>> another programming language. Second, major generation/simulation
>> packages are moving on to c++.
>
> and that is better why?
What is better?
Suddenly, modelling in physics isn't computational mathematics
and it's easier to think in object rather than procedures.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJUFublAAoJEK64IL1uI2ha5KEH/iBEdbQqrc0UDQFcJnZXYTVB
evtVw0skLbCrH8ir9IgDjMwofGHQ1ReQhDQdmEf/KyIg0kdEGE4dm19SN9ihwEgn
8JUr1Q1eHZAjhTBF0UE3GtKTgr9jrQ1PaqH9evjGQ5i5TCLZdR4BCoPbvv2e1rr7
90EgMPU5dPYd3aJqpOa+Ns0f7pc07RaDl2iWg9BAfJquxnTJFppcKqBi/dUfynB5
MKgjGuHmV4F62QOhUNS1dAmhVNm+PPUE31wSWMyegbdq3Yi5o5+jVzbDBKPwn/+4
jvXBcIPr+IMtl3vMAvQmA5DMM6Th1GhSblJrLSLHxFDvDNqctfrwbzAWa+j4OHo=
=3Qk0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
