Path: csiph.com!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder3.hal-mli.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed1a.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.023 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.95; '*S*': 0.00; 'subject:Python': 0.06; 'debugging': 0.07; 'reason,': 0.07; 'revision': 0.07; 'translator': 0.09; 'cc:addr:python-list': 0.11; 'company)': 0.16; 'compiler.': 0.16; 'formula': 0.16; 'received:mac.com': 0.16; 'rewriting': 0.16; 'subject:programming': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.18; 'numerical': 0.19; 'pointed': 0.19; 'received:10.0.1': 0.19; 'code,': 0.22; 'cc:addr:python.org': 0.22; 'cc:2**1': 0.23; 'exists': 0.24; 'why.': 0.24; '(or': 0.24; 'cc:no real name:2**0': 0.24; 'sort': 0.25; "i've": 0.25; 'equivalent': 0.26; 'downloaded': 0.26; 'needed.': 0.30; 'waste': 0.30; 'url:mailman': 0.30; 'code': 0.31; 'once,': 0.31; 'stands': 0.31; 'url:python': 0.33; "can't": 0.35; 'good.': 0.35; 'google': 0.35; 'c++': 0.36; 'url:listinfo': 0.36; 'received:10.0': 0.36; 'url:org': 0.36; 'effort': 0.37; 'application': 0.37; 'received:10': 0.37; 'received:17': 0.38; 'pm,': 0.38; 'extremely': 0.39; 'url:mail': 0.40; 'money.': 0.60; 'most': 0.60; 'ago.': 0.61; 'john': 0.61; 'first': 0.61; 'week,': 0.64; 'more': 0.64; 'charset:windows-1252': 0.65; 'mar': 0.68; 'lives': 0.74; 'analysis': 0.75; '2014,': 0.84; 'fast,': 0.84; 'header:In-reply- to:1': 0.84; 'i\x92d': 0.84 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.11.87,1.0.14,0.0.0000 definitions=2014-03-07_07:2014-03-07,2014-03-07,1970-01-01 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=7.0.1-1401130000 definitions=main-1403070164 Content-type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 MIME-version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\)) Subject: Re: Python programming From: William Ray Wing In-reply-to: <560e7dcc-6557-44b8-89f7-adaafa9f0e29@googlegroups.com> Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2014 21:46:17 -0500 Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable References: <201402112314.42370.gheskett@wdtv.com> <82055DB9-758F-4B4C-9993-FE4DA60E3D50@mac.com> <560e7dcc-6557-44b8-89f7-adaafa9f0e29@googlegroups.com> To: John Ladasky X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874) Cc: python-list@python.org, "William R. Wing" X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 24 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1394250398 news.xs4all.nl 2843 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:45863 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:68021 On Mar 7, 2014, at 1:03 PM, John Ladasky = wrote: >=20 > As for FORTRAN? This week, I actually downloaded an application which = required a FORTRAN compiler. This is the only FORTRAN application I've = ever needed. It's not old code, the first revision came out about 10 = years ago. More than once, I have queried Google with the phrase "Why = isn't FORTRAN dead yet?" For some reason, it lives on. I can't say = that I understand why. =20 > --=20 > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list Well, I=92d claim that for what it was designed for (FORTRAN stands for = FORmula TRANslator after all), it is still pretty da*mn good. It = generates extremely fast, robust code that requires much less debugging = effort than the equivalent C or C++ requires. Most of the physicists I = know still write FORTRAN, although they no longer do so exclusively. Of course, as has been pointed out, the HUGE code base of scientific and = numerical analysis code that already exists in FORTRAN makes rewriting = sort of a waste of grant (or company) money. -Bill=