Groups > comp.lang.python > #197963

Re: Blog: Is Fortran better than Python for teaching the basics of numerical linear algebra?

Path	csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!nntp.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From	"Steven G. Kargl" <sgk@REMOVEtroutmask.apl.washington.edu>
Newsgroups	sci.math, comp.lang.fortran, comp.lang.python
Subject	Re: Blog: Is Fortran better than Python for teaching the basics of numerical linear algebra?
Date	Mon, 7 Sep 2026 04:41:38 -0000 (UTC)
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Lines	74
Message-ID	<117lfa2$2u9p1$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References	<WFfnS.67381$kqHe.6119@fx07.ams4> <117k135$2fr7o$1@dont-email.me> <117knq7$2o0bv$4@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version	1.0
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding	8bit
Injection-Date	Mon, 07 Sep 2026 04:41:39 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info	dont-email.me; logging-data="3090209"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+HLQKuKC2iyD3AJi0gZYDD"; posting-host="f823273bc465a27fd3e8b733bef3ebdd"
User-Agent	Pan/0.164 (Kupiansk)
Cancel-Lock	sha1:VC+Md8jjl26UDxWVQZDm2BLH5U8= sha256:JyMAFUgFrkLqyVlx5X4Sp6k7YwGd74XIisj7b2VM+HU= sha1:SWKr7Lldik9/MppknT+EZg3v558= sha256:qhbQLW6lXcN89EqfSQRy89HlXhf9G1SG5xJxaU1AcNc=
Xref	csiph.com sci.math:647459 comp.lang.fortran:126649 comp.lang.python:197963

Cross-posted to 3 groups.

Show key headers only | View raw

On Sun, 6 Sep 2026 22:00:39 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:

> On Sun, 6 Sep 2026 15:32:53 -0000 (UTC), Thomas Koenig wrote:
> 
>> Fortran 77 makes little sense, modern Fortran variants (Fortran 90+)
>> are available with free compilers and offer much more comfort and
>> safety.
> 
> Python offers custom operator overloads, so you can write actual
> operator expressions for addition, dot product etc -- closer in
> appearance to the actual maths -- instead of parenthesis-ridden
> function calls.

Can we assume you know little to nothing about modern
Fortran?  One can write custom operator overloads in
Fortran.  Here's a Cartesian point with a translation
and scaling operators.

module pointm

   implicit none

   type point_t
      real x, y, z
   end type point_t

   interface operator(-)
      module procedure translate
   end interface

   interface operator(*)
      module procedure left
      module procedure rght
   end interface

   contains

      function translate(pt1, pt2) result(r)
         type(point_t) r
         type(point_t), intent(in) :: pt1, pt2
         r%x = pt1%x - pt2%x
         r%y = pt1%y - pt2%y
         r%z = pt1%z - pt2%z
      end function translate

      function left(c, pt1) result(r)
         type(point_t) r
         real, intent(in) :: c
         type(point_t), intent(in) :: pt1
         r%x = c * pt1%x
         r%y = c * pt1%y
         r%z = c * pt1%z
      end function left

      function rght(pt1, c) result(r)
         type(point_t) r
         real, intent(in) :: c
         type(point_t), intent(in) :: pt1
         r%x = c * pt1%x
         r%y = c * pt1%y
         r%z = c * pt1%z
      end function rght

end module pointm

program foo
   use pointm
   type(point_t) :: a = point_t(1, 1, 1),  b = point_t(0.5, 0.75, 2)
   print "(3F6.2)", a - b
   print "(3F6.2)", 3. * a - 4. * b
end program

-- 
steve

Thread

csiph-web