3 ms·
No that's a single example for a single use case. There are many languages better then Fortran for their use case. Also, it's not correct to say that C++ only
by gravypod 10y ago
No that's a single example for a single use case. There are many languages better then Fortran for their use case.
Also, it's not correct to say that C++ only just got a feature fortran had. It only just got the feature in it's standard library. There have existed complex number libraries for C++ for years.
Things like the GSL have been around since 1996.
- walshemj 10y agoNot to sound snarky but only know having this as standard and relying on for third party libararies from 1996 doesn't exactly help your point
- gravypod 10y agoGSL is the Gnu Scientific Library. It's been around since 1996. Check this for more info: https://www.gnu.org/software/gsl/ https://www.gnu.org/software/gsl/
- scottlocklin 10y agoIt is also practically speaking kind of worthless for actual numerics compared to, say, LAPACK. People who grouse about Fortran have almost never used it for its intended purpose. It solves a problem, and does so very well. People who mention Julia, Python or Rust as replacements for Fortran simply do not know what they're talking about. You can do equivalent things in C++ or C, but you really shouldn't most of the time. Just as you shouldn't try to code up fancy data structures in Fortran.