Re: IF DEAD, GOTO 10-3-39

<aborgman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
Ralph Kennedy <kennedy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
<aborgman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

Besides, I don't care if you write 28 gazillion
function libraries, the fact remains that c = a + b
is a hell of a lot more math-friendly than ADD A TO
B GIVING C.

No, mathematically its [SIC] the exact same thing.

Do you even know what the topic of this
debate is? It's ease of programming, not what
is "mathematically the exact same thing."

Nope - it's "Is there anything you can do in FORTRAN that
you cannot do in other HLLs"

Bullshit. That's just your idiotic statement,
revealing an unbelievable ignorance that only someone
who has never had to program math applications would
make. The original topic was how FORTRAN finally
made math computation easily manageable.

I haven't programmed in COBOL for over 20 years
(and did scarce little of it even then), but if
you're going to tell me that:

MULTIPLY B by B GIVING X.
MULTIPLY D BY E GIVING Y.
ADD A TO X GIVING C.
SUBTRACT Y FROM C GIVING C.
SUBTRACT F FROM C GIVING C.

is just as easy to write as:

c = a + b**2 - d * e - f

It takes more typing, but it is just as easy to write...
and it is certainly no less "math friendly".

then you're a complete idot. The fact that they are
"mathematically the exact same thing" is completely
irrelevant to the issue, to wit, that math is infinitely
more a pain in the ass in COBOL than in FORTRAN.

Except that was never the issue.

It was always the issue. I wrote:

Anything more than trivial mathematical computation is
tortuous COBOL, and even that is a pain in the ass.

and you, the lone voice in the wilderness, took that
as your cue to sally forth to prove me wrong, a fool's
errand if there ever was one.

--Ralph Kennedy {ames,gatech,husc6,rutgers}!ncar!noao!asuvax!kennedy
{allegra,decvax,ihnp4,oddjob}--^
^---------------The Wrong Choice
internet: kennedy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"This is rsfc, not the Algonquin roundtable."
-xyzzy, 2/16/07
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: IF DEAD, GOTO 10-3-39
    ... mathematically its the exact same thing. ... The original topic was how FORTRAN finally ... made math computation easily manageable. ... I don't consider programming in assembler to be ...
    (rec.sport.football.college)
  • Re: Maths constants
    ... It could be similar argument reduction and polynomials ... Among the problems here is that x87 hasn't been a usual mode of operation for Fortran since SSE2 was introduced 8 years ago. ... I studied math back in the days when calculus was considered important to a much larger number of people than numerical analysis. ... Other than by putting sufficient digits in your constant. ...
    (comp.lang.fortran)
  • Re: vemsa3d 1.1 - a floss visual em simulator for 3d antennas
    ... math is defined by a computer language and you are good-to-go. ... Both are available as FORTRAN source. ... I would be really surprised if you could patent math formulas, equations, etc. ...
    (rec.radio.amateur.antenna)
  • Re: how do I get more numbers past the decimal?
    ... It doesn't matter what language you are using - you will NEVER get exact ... You will also never get exact results for some math operations, ... If you like the simplest example of a chaotic system is balancing a pencil on its point, and working out which way it will fall. ... Never mind the maths, you know it depends on the draught that sets it in motion, or the precision with which you can balance it. ...
    (comp.lang.php)
  • Re: I want to write HAL in C++ !
    ... > recursive descent parsing for arbitrarily complex math FORmulas, ... On the subject of Fortran you are obnoxious and ignorant. ... been spelled with all upper caps since the 1990 standard. ... Do you think libraries like LAPACK are "fragile cruft"? ...
    (comp.lang.cpp)