3 Jan
2012
3 Jan
'12
12:41 p.m.
In article <4F025F92.15804.365E05A at cclist.sydex.com>,
"Chuck Guzis" <cclist at sydex.com> writes:
On 3 Jan 2012 at 2:28, Richard wrote:
They're all turing equivalent, so you could write the same thing in
Brainfuck as you could in FORTRAN, but I'm pretty sure you would
rather work in FORTAN 66. The same comparison works with modern
languages to put FORTRAN 66 on the losing side.
--
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" -- DirectX 9 version available for download
<http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com/the-direct3d-graphics-pipeline/>
Legalize Adulthood! <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com>
It's not really a fair comparison as we
expect a "modern" language to
do much more than FORTRAN 66.
Do what, exactly? Are you saying that simple languages can't "do"
what more complicated ones do?