home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky comp.edu:1499 comp.lang.fortran:3395 comp.lang.misc:2905 comp.arch:9183 sci.math:10907
- Newsgroups: comp.edu,comp.lang.fortran,comp.lang.misc,comp.arch,sci.math
- Path: sparky!uunet!ftpbox!mothost!white!sapphire.rtsg.mot.com!declrckd
- From: declrckd@rtsg.mot.com (Dan J. Declerck)
- Subject: Re: Scientists as Programmers (was Re: Small Language Wanted)
- Message-ID: <1992Sep2.205038.10429@rtsg.mot.com>
- Sender: news@rtsg.mot.com
- Nntp-Posting-Host: marble
- Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
- References: <1992Aug31.133811.3626@crd.ge.com> <25910@dog.ee.lbl.gov> <92245.124125KGZXK@ASUACAD.BITNET>
- Distribution: na
- Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 20:50:38 GMT
- Lines: 164
-
- In article <92245.124125KGZXK@ASUACAD.BITNET> Zafer KADI <KGZXK@ASUACAD.BITNET> writes:
- >I have been on both sides of issue (I have MS's in both Mech.Eng CS)
- >
- >There is no one wrong or right on the issue of :
- >
- >1. FORTRAN or anyother language.
- > All you Computer Science major that think Fortran is so bad can
- >you tell me anyother language that has all the forms of numbers
- >that the scinetist use such as integers, real numbers and COMPLEX
- >numbers. If I am a CFD or any other dicipline that require
- >complex numbers, which language should I use? Or should I become
- >a proficient C programmer to be able to develop my own comlex number
- >structure? I am just at the beginning of desiding to leran how to program
- >should I use C and make all kind of mistakes that are very difficult to
- >find or use Pascal and not able to have any tools for developing the
- >program but furthermore develop slower programs, and in bothe cases
- >no COMPLEX numbers. HMMM.. there is a language called FORTRAN and has complex
- >numbers, it has Scientific Libraries, it has all kind of tools to debug and
- >develop programs, why not use that? Yes, my Computer Science friend
- >told me that FORTRAN is the worst language in the world. He must be right
- >and all those people in the industry must have eaten their brains for lunch.
-
- Try C++, creating an object called COMPLEX, then re-define the operators of
- + - and * to get what good ol Fortan gives you. Since I have a background in CS,
- I can tell you that modern block structured languages lend themselves to
- optimization better than older unstructured ones (a CS compiler course will teach you
- this). Therefore by moving to C++ your code would be more readable AND would be
- faster (YMMV, it depends on the compiler). You might consider a C++ class,
- it sure helped our RF simulation people.
- C++ can catch the wierdness of C at compile time, about as good as pascal,
- but it does not have array bounds checking.
- Regarding libraries, there are companies that sell libraries, but I'm not sure
- they're like LINPACK, or any other thing similar, since I don't do scientific
- programming.
-
- >
- >This is a true story and happend last Spring when I had to take S/W
- >development class.
- >
- >The instructor asked how many know FORTRAN :
- >
- >You heard the same laughs and smurks as we hear all the time on this
- >netpost, and only 3 people out of (60) raised their hand.
- >
- >Then he asked how many know COBOL :
- >
- >4 hands came up.
- >
- >(This was senior level class, with most people graduating).
- >
- >He just said welcome to the real world, when you get out
- >do not expect people to ask you to help, develop or program in
- >Pascal or even C. (Ada sometimes), but COBOL and FORTRAN.
- >
- >Issue # 2:
- >
- >About having global variables or not and if making calls slows the
- >program and optimization: Yes it does.
-
- Same with C or C++, depends how you build your program.
- Most good programmers know this.
-
- >
- >About the MIPS compiler :
- > This compiler is not faultless :
- > Example : Has a problem with complex numbers in FORTRAN when the
- > -r8 option is used (does not promote them, even though
- > it should. If you have a DEC or an SGI they use the
- > MIPS compiler
- >
- > To have the optimization of the nature that the previous person
- >mentioned about the compiler is to compiler everything together.
- >That will break the consept of modularity and the need to develop
- >each part of the program as a subrotuine or function, since at
- >the end you can insert it. There are switches as I remember for that compiler
- > to insert code.
- >
- >As you see no one will win on this. Do you want the program to be faster or
- >clearly written for your own standards.....
-
- This is not always the case, if need really smokin' speed, how come you're not
- programming in assembler, like Herman Rubin??
-
-
-
- >
- >Issue # 3
- >
- >Most of the professors here have conections with the industry and most of the
- >reseacrh done at ASU in Computer Sciences is closelly industry related.
- >No one can accuse profs of being in another universe here (in my opinion)
- >
-
- Sounds OK to me... Does the physics department help out medical sciences by designing
- radiology equipment?? (Fermilab does this).
-
-
- >
- >Issue # 4
- >CS major has no right of accusing other majors of not knowing the computers
- >well enough, because it mostly comes down to the person.
-
- Whole-heartedly agree!
- We do like to inform the non-CS about new stuff, like the above paragraphs.
- CS is kinda like Tool and Die, we make tools for others to use, even other CS
- people. Some of this stuff isn't simple, look at UNIX or Perl, or JCL (ugh!).
-
-
- >
- > Issue # 5
- >I totally agree that CS majors do not have enough knowledge
- >in mathematics and physics and if you are taking classes
- >in Computer Graphics or Computer Aidded Design all you CS major that
- >thing that programming is everything in your job or knowing how
- >the computer works will realize it isn't so.
- >The above opinion is not only mine but most of the profs in
- >the CS dept. at ASU, mostly Comp. Graph. and CAGD.
- >
-
- I don't think so, I learn new things every day. Right now I'm learning why the
- physics community is really pissed at us (grin!). I'm my spare time, I'm trying
- to learn the concepts of combustion sciences, so I can build a better engine controller.
- The past application of comp sci to this area is really in the dumper.
-
- >
- > Issue # 6
- >
- >On the other hand as a consulatnt at ASU, I have seen scientists
- >that do not have the idea what computer is and when the computer
- >does something "illogical" they say it is not them but
- >
- >the computer.
- >One person said:
- >
- > "Your computer is stupid !"
- >
- >In my opinion, if you want to learn how to program, you should at least know
- >about how the numbers are stored on the computer .
-
- For your stuff, machine epsilon is VERY important (I learned this in a numerical methods
- class in the Math Department of my undergrad university). I use it today, in
- embedded work by simulating floating point on a fixed point processor.
-
-
- >
- >The amaizing thing is I have seen papers written based on some strange reslt.
- >Most of the old Fortran 77 books talk about it but the new once skip it
- >and so many people skip those pages anyway.
- >
- >My two cents
- >
- >No one is wrong and no one is right as far as the job gets done.
-
- True, but sometimes it is better to use a screwdriver instead of a hammer.
- It depends upon the job.
-
- -Dan
-
-
- --
- => Dan DeClerck | EMAIL: dand%isdgsm@rtsg.mot.com <=
- => Motorola Intl Subscriber Group | <=
- => | Phone: (708) 632-4486 <=
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-