Why these original FORTRAN quirks?
in [Fortran]
|
From: Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj on 30 Oct 2006 15:12 Greg Lindahl wrote: > In article <lAe1h.41674$X11.28864(a)bignews7.bellsouth.net>, > Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj <urjlew(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > >>I don't know that there is a 'usual method' for quoting >>in that situation. > > > It goes like this: > > In article <lAe1h.41674$X11.28864(a)bignews7.bellsouth.net>, > Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj <urjlew(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > >>I don't know that there is a 'usual method' for quoting >>in that situation. > > > Talk about the first quote. > > In article <lAe1h.41674$X11.28864(a)bignews7.bellsouth.net>, > Rostyslaw J. Lewyckyj <urjlew(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > >>I don't know that there is a 'usual method' for quoting >>in that situation. > > > Talk about the second quote. > > The important part is preserving the leading >, that's a signal to > anyone replying that they need to preserve the attribution. > > -- greg > ========================================== Which clears things up about as much as stirring a mudhole with an eggbeater. :) > >
From: Charles Richmond on 30 Oct 2006 16:34 Brian Inglis wrote: > > [snip...] [snip...] [snip...] > > ...and ISTR their standard drivers went haywire if you didn't clip or > scale the vectors to the paper width: drew right down the edge of the > paper, then started drawing from wherever they ended up, a few feet > away from where they should be plotting. > > I'm a big fan of previewing, to avoid including insignificant outlying > data, and autoscaling, to be able to show all of the data, regardless > of output media size. > Nice to be able to view project plans a few feet high and umpty feet > long on the wall. > "Back in the day", at a PPoE, we taped strips of "butcher paper" to the wall and used Magic Markers to draw our project plans and flows. These were umpty-ump feet wide and tall. -- +----------------------------------------------------------------+ | Charles and Francis Richmond richmond at plano dot net | +----------------------------------------------------------------+
From: Charles Richmond on 30 Oct 2006 16:41 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > > In article <1162080057.213334.46970(a)f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>, > "Terence" <tbwright(a)cantv.net> wrote: > >Peter Flass wrote: > >> I hate to say this, but using a spreadsheet for this is like using a > >> trowel to dig Lake Mead. I know that "if all you have is a > >> screwdriver...", but there are lots of graphics programs that could > >> handle this easily. Think SAS, for example. > > > >With respect to Peter whose note I am only using as an example, I see > >comments like this too often to resist replying at this poin, on the > >assumptions. > > > >SAS is wonderful, sure. > >Excel comes with Microsoft Office and much else. > >Winteracter has a great reputation for getting you that GUI you need, > >sure. > > > >But WHOS's money will pay for these add-ons to a stunted Fortran? > >So many programmers report having several Fortran compilers at their > >fingertips, and give indications of having other software systems as > >adjuncts, > > <snip> > > >Bill Gates spotted the software market future and IBM didn't; but the > >costs of using Fortran for any scientific work are becoming ridiculous. > > <snip> > > What lanugage do you think scientists use instead of FORTRAN? > I saw a documentary about Stepben Hawking from 15 or so years ago, and his folks were using Pascal. I also understand that Algol used to be *very* popular in Europe for scientific programming. AFAIK, FORTRAN was *not* so popular in Europe as it was in the US. I knew several engineering graduate students in the late 70's, and understand that programming work for their theses *had* to be done in FORTRAN. The thesis would be rejected if the software was done in another language. -- +----------------------------------------------------------------+ | Charles and Francis Richmond richmond at plano dot net | +----------------------------------------------------------------+
From: Peter Flass on 30 Oct 2006 17:23 Greg Lindahl wrote: > In article <l711h.488$xw1.226(a)twister.nyroc.rr.com>, > Peter Flass <Peter_Flass(a)Yahoo.com> wrote: > > >>Now fewer and fewer people develop software that is used by more and >>more people. The market for compilers is becoming more limited, but the >>cost of developing a compiler is not decreasing nearly as rapidly, so >>the prices of commercial compilers have jumped. > > > I don't think there's proof of any of this. Well, you're right. I should have said "IMHO." I think we can take it as fact that the percentage of computer users who ptogram has been declining sharply, however. > > BTW, the cost of developing a compiloer varies widely by organization; > the QLogic (PathScale) compiler team is about 1/40 the size of Intel's > compiler team. And most of the cost of the Fortran compiler in both > organizations is shared with the C and C++ compilers. > > When considering the size of the market, you should also include all > the folks using Matlab, as they used to be people in the Fortran > market. The fact that conventional Fortran compilers have failed these > people is unfortunate, but it's still a reachable market. > > -- greg >
From: Brian Inglis on 30 Oct 2006 21:11
On Mon, 30 Oct 2006 15:34:39 -0600 in alt.folklore.computers, Charles Richmond <richchas(a)comcast.net> wrote: >Brian Inglis wrote: >> >> [snip...] [snip...] [snip...] >> >> ...and ISTR their standard drivers went haywire if you didn't clip or >> scale the vectors to the paper width: drew right down the edge of the >> paper, then started drawing from wherever they ended up, a few feet >> away from where they should be plotting. >> >> I'm a big fan of previewing, to avoid including insignificant outlying >> data, and autoscaling, to be able to show all of the data, regardless >> of output media size. >> Nice to be able to view project plans a few feet high and umpty feet >> long on the wall. >> >"Back in the day", at a PPoE, we taped strips of "butcher paper" >to the wall and used Magic Markers to draw our project plans and >flows. These were umpty-ump feet wide and tall. But so lo-tech! ;^> -- Thanks. Take care, Brian Inglis Calgary, Alberta, Canada Brian.Inglis(a)CSi.com (Brian[dot]Inglis{at}SystematicSW[dot]ab[dot]ca) fake address use address above to reply |