- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg29635] Re: PS.
- From: Jens-Peer Kuska <kuska at informatik.uni-leipzig.de>
- Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2001 01:36:08 -0400 (EDT)
- Organization: Universitaet Leipzig
- References: <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com
Hi, > Senior members of the mathematical community still consider FORTRAN a viable > solution to mathematical computing. There is a sharp difference between *numerical* and *mathematical* computing. Numerics in *not* mathematics. It is some kind of black magic. > This has the following effects: > a) Computer algebra systems are not adopted ...(the "why buy Mathematica, > when you have FORTAN?" argument) Huhhh ? Again numerics is not mathematics *and* Mathematica is *not* for prior numerical work ! > b) Young researchers are forced to implement new techniques in FORTRAN, just > so that their supervisors can understand their code... It is always good when a supervisor understand the code of a student! If the student don't like it, there should be other supervisors. > c) ...which reinforces the choke-hold FORTRAN has on mathematics. > d) Young mathematicians are introduced to Scientific Computation with the > use of FORTRAN, which makes thinking in other paradigms (such as > rules-programming or list-programming or even OOP) more difficult. I can't see any application of "rule based" or "logic" programming in numerics. The rule search take a sufficient amount of time and it is not a good idea to add this overhead to an numerical subroutine. Needles to say that it is a blessing that the students are not forced to use object oriented programming ! I don't like FORTRAN very much but if it keeps the students away from OOP-plague it is the best argument to use FORTRAN more often ! I should start a FORTRAN programming course here -- or better two. Regards Jens