Just curious is Fotran Still being used in Newer Projects
Nota only it keeps being used, the latest versions support generics, modules and OOP.
It even got modules before C++.
Fortran Package Manager
31–40 of 73 posts
Re: Fortran Package Manager
#32Re: Fortran Package Manager
#33I rely on FPM the Effing Package manager[0]. Occasionally, I run into php-fpm [1]. There's an unfortunate naming collision, at least with the first.
Re: Fortran Package Manager
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
It depends on what you are doing. If it is numerical work with matrix operations, then Fortran is fast and pretty intuitive. Some of the annoyances come from dealing with legacy code and mixing it with modern standards.
Also Compared to Python Fortran is an old school compiled language - you have to get used to working with a compline/link cycle without the interactivity that Python has. This isn't any better or worse but does require a shift in mind set. Though I believe some people are trying to build a Fortan Repl
> Also Compared to Python Fortran is an old school compiled language - you have to get used to working with a compline/link cycle without the interactivity that Python has.
I mean, yeah, Fortran is a bit old school, but being compiled is not exactly old school. Plenty of modern languages are compiled. I'd even say that Python and JS are the odd ones out from a modern perspective.
Re: Fortran Package Manager
#35Fortran has a lot of interesting current compiler work leveraging MLIR, a subproject of LLVM: Flang [0] and CIL for C/C++/Fortran [1]. It seems like Fortran tooling is making somewhat of a comeback. [0]: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/tree/main/flang [1]: https://llvm.org/devmtg/2020-09/slides/CIL_Common_MLIR_Abstr...
"I don't know what the language of the year 2000 will look like, but I know it will be called Fortran." —Tony Hoare
I have seen this quote thrown around a lot and have never had the proper context to understand what Hoare was getting at.
The quote is from 1982[1], which seems a bit too late for any “Fortran juggernaut” jokes to have been relevant, and even in 1982 I would have guessed that Fortran was considered a bit old-fashioned. Was he commenting on its comparatively simple design, compared to “flashier” languages like Pascal? Was he just noting its ubiquity in science / government work? Or was Fortran at the time considered a buzzword, something cool-sounding to rope ignorant managers into approving tech projects?
I am a Young Person (thirties) so this era of computing is before my time. More to the point, Hoare’s statement was a deliberately squishy social comment and not a rigorous computer-science comment, which makes it harder for outsiders to “objectively” understand his point. I just can’t see a way that Fortran really fits in the comment - what was the punchline supposed to be?
[1] https://arstechnica.com/science/2014/05/scientific-computing...
Re: Fortran Package Manager
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
Really that’s interesting, just curious fortran over other languages
The intuition is similar to "why C over other languages?": speed. Many programmers treat C as the fastest/lowest-level cross-platform language, but Fortran sometimes has a slight edge (especially with specialised compilers, e.g. I remember Intel's producing very fast binaries). Although it's general-purpose, Fortran skews heavily towards numerical calculations, which is probably why it's not used much outside science…
But interfacing with Fortran from other languages is easy (well, barring some compiler assumptions that everyone seems to be making anyway). Why not leverage the general purpose strength of languages like Rust or C++ or Python (or even C), while still retaining access to the vast trove of numerical Fortran libraries?
(Not that I'm judging, people should use whatever language they prefer).
Re: Fortran Package Manager
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, but I think not as much as advocates of it would suggest.
Just like SQL, it suffices to rule on one specific use case to keep being used.
SQL is based on set theory and there is a reason for its existence. FORTRAN is based on legacy. Still remember the I j k and 80 columns things ...
To be honest reading https://github.com/fortran-lang/fpm/blob/master/src/fpm_back... the only thing look like the old fortran I know is integer I j and do loop. No go to I guess.
Re: Fortran Package Manager
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just like SQL, it suffices to rule on one specific use case to keep being used.
SQL is based on set theory and there is a reason for its existence. FORTRAN is based on legacy. Still remember the I j k and 80 columns things ... To be honest reading https://github.com/fortran-lang/fpm/blob/master/src/fpm_back... the only thing look like the old fortran I know is integer I j and do loop. No go to I guess.
Apparently you haven't kept up with times.
Re: Fortran Package Manager
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
"I don't know what the language of the year 2000 will look like, but I know it will be called Fortran." —Tony Hoare
I have seen this quote thrown around a lot and have never had the proper context to understand what Hoare was getting at. The quote is from 1982[1], which seems a bit too late for any “Fortran juggernaut” jokes to have been relevant, and even in 1982 I would have guessed that Fortran was considered a bit old-fashioned. Was he commenting on its comparatively simple design, compared to “flashier” languages like Pascal?…
In 1982, FORTRAN use was widespread. The limitations of the language were well known, and it was "obvious to all" that the languages of the future would be more sophisticated and overall "better" than FORTRAN.
It was not "cool", but very mainstream. Taught to all engineering majors in college. And it was the go to language when COBOL wasn't a match.
I interpret this statement as pointing at the tremendous inertia against change, and the fact that most of the tasks given to the computer do not require a abstraction and advanced concepts; just the "IF THEN", "DO", and assignment.
I think he was off by 10 years.
Even now "You can write FORTRAN in any language". I have seen javascript done this way. And it works. We can argue about how well, but it works.
Re: Fortran Package Manager
#40Just curious is Fotran Still being used in Newer Projects
Yes, see for example http://mesa.sourceforge.net/index.html which is a stellar evolution code used a lot in astrophysics.