On Wed, 4 Feb 2004 15:01:21 GMT, Andy Cowley
wrote:

Peter O. Brackett wrote:


From Fortran to C, what a waste of coding time... and how many errors
were introduced in the translation? Heh, heh. :-)
And how many were fixed? From what he says about his
test results, very, very few errors were introduced.

Many would feel... What a crime?
Many more might feel "What crime?".

What's wrong with perfectly good Fortran?
Same thing that's wrong with a perfectly good boil on your ass. 8-)

BTW... there's nothing wrong with "GOTO"s that aren't readily fixed with
simple matching "COMEFROM" statements!

Try Cobol. The 'ALTER' statement was a computed come-from!
Fortran programmers can only dream of the job security that
flowed from that.

I give you (from ancient memory)...

NAME1 NOP NAME2
OI X'FF', NAME1 + 2
/* MORE CODE */
NAME2 EQU *

What's it do?

The math libraries in C are at least as good as those in Fortran and
the control and data structures actually exist.

Does DOD still require everything to be written in Ada?

Is NASTRAN still around or is there now a flight-rated C compiler.

Ever write any validated software? Now there's some fun.

Russ


Rest in Peace E. Djkystra!

A good Fortran programmer can write Fortran in any language. ;-)
What Neoklis has done seems to avoid that pitfall. If he has made
all that NEC2 spaghetti more comprehensible to mere mortals then
he's done us all a really big favour.

vy 73

Andy, M1EBV