Fortran vs. C for numerical work

[BRADBERRY,JOHN L]

On Nov 25 18:55:29 EST 1990 in Article <34828> , (Dan Salomon)
<salomon at ccu.umanitoba.ca> writes:

>Here are the reasons that FORTRAN has not been replaced by C:
>
> 1) C is definitely for wizards, not beginners or casual
>    programmers.
>    Usually people who are heavily into numerical work are not
>    hacker
>    types.  They are mathematicians, scientists, or engineers.
  
I agree! The group described happens to represent most of the
clients I deal with in Radar and Antenna applications. As in the
original derivation of the name, these people are FOR-mula TRAN-
slators! 
>
>..(text deleted)...
>
>The reasons that C should replace FORTRAN for numerical work:
>
>..(text deleted)...
>
  3) FORTRAN ANSI standards take entirely too long to pass through
committees and there is little or no effort made to 'purge' old
style Watfor/V methods from 'current' teaching texts! I wouldn't
be surprised to see references to 'card decks' in 'current' FORTRAN
books into the year 3000 (programmers live forever!)...

Sorry about the digression!
-- 
John L. Bradberry        |Georgia Tech Research Inst|uucp:..!prism!gt4512c
Scientific Concepts Inc. |Microwaves and Antenna Lab|Int : gt4512c at prism
2359 Windy Hill Rd. 201-J|404 528-5325 (GTRI)       |GTRI:jbrad at msd.gatech.
Marietta, Ga. 30067      |404 438-4181 (SCI)        |'...is this thing on..?'