home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
/ NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #1 / NN_1993_1.iso / spool / comp / lang / fortran / 4907 < prev    next >
Encoding:
Text File  |  1993-01-04  |  1.2 KB  |  28 lines
  1. Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran
  2. Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!saimiri.primate.wisc.edu!caen!hellgate.utah.edu!lanl!cochiti.lanl.gov!jlg
  3. From: jlg@cochiti.lanl.gov (J. Giles)
  4. Subject: Re: Is FORTRAN a viable language?
  5. Message-ID: <1993Jan4.201229.12073@newshost.lanl.gov>
  6. Sender: news@newshost.lanl.gov
  7. Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory
  8. References:  <1hqnn7INNfac@shelley.u.washington.edu>
  9. Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 20:12:29 GMT
  10. Lines: 16
  11.  
  12. In article <1hqnn7INNfac@shelley.u.washington.edu>, chew@accel.aa.washington.edu (Gilbert Chew) writes:
  13. |> [...]
  14. |> However, while perusing the newsgroups for help
  15. |> and information in buying said compiler, I noticed
  16. |> that the C/C++ newsgroup seems to have about
  17. |> 100 times the traffic of the FORTRAN newsgroup!
  18.  
  19. If you actually look at those newsgroups, you will find that most of
  20. the traffic consists of trivial questions and long discussions about
  21. issues which *should be* well defined and easy to learn/use/describe
  22. in any really well designed language.  In other words, it's not clear
  23. whether the volume of traffic in those groups is because of greater
  24. popularity of the language or because of poorer design.
  25.  
  26. -- 
  27. J. Giles
  28.