Ars technica looks at Fortran, and some new number crunching languages in Scientific computing's future: Can any coding language top a 1950s behemoth?
This state of affairs seems paradoxical. Why, in a temple of modernity employing research instruments at the bleeding edge of technology, does a language from the very earliest days of the electronic computer continue to dominate? When Fortran was created, our ancestors were required to enter their programs by punching holes in cardboard rectangles: one statement per card, with a tall stack of these constituting the code. There was no vim or emacs. If you made a typo, you had to punch a new card and give the stack to the computer operator again. Your output came to you on a heavy pile of paper. The computers themselves, about as powerful as today's smartphones, were giant installations that required entire buildings.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Jaruzel on Friday May 09 2014, @09:57AM
If you made a typo...
Oh the irony, the summary title has a typo in it! (Unless of course that's deliberate; Is SN now running Fortran?)
-Jar
This is my opinion, there are many others, but this one is mine.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 09 2014, @10:32AM
Real programmers can run FORTRAN on any web framework!