Re: Fortran vs. C (was Re: Ken & Klaus.)
beliavsky_at_aol.com
Date: 09/21/04
- Next message: Dr. Jai Maharaj: "STEALTH COATINGS FOR AIRCRAFT"
- Previous message: beliavsky_at_aol.com: "Re: Fortran vs. C (was Re: Ken & Klaus.)"
- In reply to: Harry Conover: "Re: Fortran vs. C (was Re: Ken & Klaus.)"
- Next in thread: Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz: "Re: Fortran vs. C (was Re: Ken & Klaus.)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 21 Sep 2004 15:45:10 -0700
hhc314@yahoo.com (Harry Conover) wrote in message news:<7ce4e226.0409201650.2adfbd38@posting.google.com>...
<SNIP>
> Comparing Fortran to C is in my mind similar to comparing Fortran to
> Assembly Language, since C is only a slight step above assembly
> language. C offsets this limitation by providing absolutely wonderful
> data structuring and access shortcuts called (strangely enough)
> pointers and structures. By contrast, navigating your way through
> complex data structures in Fortran becomes a major hassle, and a great
> burner of CPU time.
Fortran 90 and later versions has POINTERs (very different from those
of C) and dynamic array allocation using the ALLOCATE statement.
Creating linked lists and other structures is no longer difficult, as
shown in (for example) a book by R. Vowels "Introduction to Fortran
90/95, Algorithms, and Structured Programming"
http://www.users.bigpond.com/robin_v/f90-cont.htm .
- Next message: Dr. Jai Maharaj: "STEALTH COATINGS FOR AIRCRAFT"
- Previous message: beliavsky_at_aol.com: "Re: Fortran vs. C (was Re: Ken & Klaus.)"
- In reply to: Harry Conover: "Re: Fortran vs. C (was Re: Ken & Klaus.)"
- Next in thread: Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz: "Re: Fortran vs. C (was Re: Ken & Klaus.)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|